Логин или email Регистрация Пароль Я забыл пароль


Войти при помощи:

Судебные дела / Зарубежная практика  / Ali Faisal Sheerazi v. Commissioner., United States Tax Court - Memorandum Decision, T.C. Memo. 1994-245, Docket No. 7857-93., May 31, 1994

Ali Faisal Sheerazi v. Commissioner., United States Tax Court - Memorandum Decision, T.C. Memo. 1994-245, Docket No. 7857-93., May 31, 1994

25.06.2008  

Ali Faisal Sheerazi v. Commissioner.

United States Tax Court - Memorandum Decision

T.C. Memo. 1994-245

Docket No. 7857-93.

May 31, 1994.

Ali Faisal Sheerazi, pro se. Patricia A. Riegger, for the respondent.

Memorandum Opinion

DINAN, Special Trial Judge: This case was heard pursuant to the provisions of section 7443A(b)(3) and Rules 180, 181, and 182. 1

**********

1 All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the taxable year in issue. All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

**********

Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax for the year 1991 in the amount of $2,604.

The sole issue for decision is whether petitioner is entitled to deduct interest paid to the IRS on income taxes and additions to tax.

Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found. The stipulations of fact and attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference.

Petitioner resided in Flushing, New York, on the date the petition was filed in this case. Petitioner timely filed his tax return for the year 1991 with the IRS. Petitioner is an accountant working in a Manhattan, New York, certified public accounting firm.

Sometime prior to 1991, the IRS determined a deficiency in petitioner's Federal income tax and additions to tax. 2 In order to pay the amounts determined, petitioner and the IRS entered into an installment agreement in which petitioner was required to make small monthly payments to the IRS spanning a number of years.

**********

2 Petitioner refused to reveal any details surrounding the deficiency and the installment agreement, such as the amount, the year it related to, or when it was determined, monthly payments, and the like.

**********

In 1991, petitioner decided to pay to the IRS the remaining balance due, rather than to continue making the monthly payments. Petitioner paid the IRS approximately $12,000, of which $8,500 was interest on the income tax deficiency and the additions to tax.

On Schedule A, line 9b, entitled "Home mortgage interest not reported to you on Form 1098", of petitioner's 1991 Federal income tax return, petitioner claimed a deduction for interest paid to the "Internal Revenue Service" in the amount of $8,500. Respondent, in her notice of deficiency, disallowed the deduction on the ground that the interest was personal interest, which was not deductible. Petitioner claims that interest paid to the IRS is deductible under section 163.

Deductions are strictly a matter of legislative grace. New Colonial Ice Co. v. Helvering [4 USTC ╤ 1292], 292 U.S. 435 (1934). The taxpayer has the burden of proving his entitlement to all deductions claimed. Rule 142(a); Welch v. Helvering [3 USTC ╤ 1164], 290 U.S. 111 (1933).

Interest on income tax deficiencies and additions to tax is generally considered to be personal interest of the individual taxpayer. Perkins v. Commissioner [Dec. 45,584], 92 T.C. 749, 752 n.3 (1989); sec. 1.163-9T(b)(2), Income Tax Regs., 52 Fed. Reg. 48407, 48409 (Dec. 22, 1987).

Section 163(h) (1) specifically provides that in the case of a taxpayer other than a corporation no deduction shall be allowed for personal interest paid or accrued during the taxable year.

Section 163(h) (2) defines personal interest to mean any interest other than≈

(A) interest paid or accrued on indebtedness properly allocable to a trade or business (other than the trade or business of performing services as an employee),

(B) any investment interest * * *,

(C) any interest which is taken into account * * * in computing income or loss from a passive activity of the taxpayer,

(D) any qualfied residence interest * * *

Petitioner claimed a deduction in the amount of $8,500 paid to the IRS which was for interest on income tax deficiencies and additions to tax. Such payment was personal interest, and accordingly, it is not deductible. Sec. 163(h).

Based on the foregoing,

Decision will be entered for respondent.

Разместить:

Вы также можете   зарегистрироваться  и/или  авторизоваться  

   

ТОП-5 трудностей представления электронных документов в суд

Электронные документы «пробиваются» в российские суды уже на протяжении семи лет. В 2010 году была внесена первая поправка в статью 41 Арбитражного процессуального кодекса РФ, позволившая участникам судебного процесса представлять в Арбитражный суд документы в электронном виде. С этого момента вносилось множество изменений и дополнений в различные правовые акты, были изданы новые нормативные документы (подробнее об этом читайте в материалах авторов Synerdocs в конце этой статьи)

Хитров Дмитрий
Хитров Дмитрий

Компания «Электронный арбитраж»

Почему в суд выгодно представлять именно электронные документы?

Право и возможность подачи электронных документов в суд предоставлено в России давно. Однако по старинке стороны ходят на заседания с большими папками бумажных документов вместо планшетов или ноутбуков. Почему?

Суфиянова Татьяна
Суфиянова Татьяна

Российский налоговый портал

Ошибки риэлтора могут помешать получению имущественного вычета

При совершении сделок при покупке или продаже жилья советую быть внимательным при подписании договора купли-продажи. В противном случае покупатель не сможет вернуть НДФЛ в полном размере.

25