- 4 -
$400 per week. In a domestic relations matter around the same
time he also executed an affidavit to the effect that he was paid
$600 per week. At trial, he maintained that the $600 figure was
correct.
Discussion
There is no question that petitioner received gross income
from Treu Air. The question is how much he received. In
answering this we have a contest of credibility between
petitioner and his brother, neither of whom was a model of
candor.2 The matter is more convoluted because the records of
Treu Air and petitioner are either nonexistent or confusing to
the extent that they shed little light on the controversy. Both
petitioner and his brother probably believe their testimony was
truthful. But it is questionable whether either really knows the
answer to the question. Given these facts, we are left to make
an educated guess as to what petitioner’s gross income from Treu
Air was.
Petitioner executed a contemporaneous affidavit stating that
his income was $600 per week. It would seem reasonable that he
took at least 2 weeks of vacation for which he was not paid.
While the notations on the company check register indicate that
petitioner was paid more, it is undisputed that Treu Air
2 Sec. 7491(a), concerning the burden of proof, is inappli-
cable because petitioner has not satisfied its requirements.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011