- 27 -
Davis v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 122, 141-142 (1987), affd. 866
F.2d 852 (6th Cir. 1989); see also Anaya v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1991-91, affd. 983 F.2d 186 (10th Cir. 1993). However,
that is not the case here.
Petitioner corroborated his testimony on the use of the bank
deposits with bank statements for each of the three accounts and
exhibits summarizing various annotated checks. His testimony at
the trial in these cases is consistent with his earlier testimony
in the criminal trial of his former associates Michael Gilbert
and Fainsbert and the civil forfeiture trial adjunct to his own
criminal trial. The flows of funds that petitioner did explain
were almost exclusively directed towards the entities associated
with Ben's powerboat racing, paying Allsworth for his legal and
other services, and paying for other costs that Ben had incurred.
As in Brittingham v. Commissioner, the facts are persuasive.
Petitioner's testimony, corroborated as it is, constitutes
compelling evidence that tips "the scales in * * * [petitioner's]
favor", Brittingham v. Commissioner, supra at 101, and, insofar
as these particular expenditures are concerned, enables him to
meet his burden of proof.
Respondent did not controvert petitioner's testimony that he
made each of these disbursements at Ben's behest. Respondent
also did not dispute petitioner's assertion that Ben, not he,
controlled and owned the various Apache enterprises.
Respondent's failure on this count is telling because the
Page: Previous 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011