- 42 - between a taxpayer's actual income and his reported income is evidence of fraud. Stone v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. at 224. "This is particularly true where * * * there is other evidence that the taxpayer was engaged in unlawful activities which at once offer a probable explanation of the concealment, and make other violations of law, including tax fraud, less difficult to believe". Manton v. Commissioner, a Memorandum Opinion of this Court dated Nov. 22, 1948 (citing Rogers v. Commissioner, 111 F.2d 987 (6th Cir. 1940), affg. 38 B.T.A. 16 (1938)); see also Recklitis v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. at 912. Even with the reduction in unexplained income that petitioner's explanations showed, large discrepancies still exist for which petitioner provided no evidence or explanation and for which we can find no answers, even given the corroborating circumstances of the conduit nature of Safra. This is especially true for 1986, specifically the June expenditures of $206,500. It is also true for 1987, where both respondent and petitioner stipulated $36,088 in unexplained bank deposits and analysis of the records shows that as much as $41,899.34 of deposits in the three accounts remained unexplained. When these discrepancies are viewed in the context of petitioner's admitted illegal activity, his demonstrated understanding of the consequences of his failure to report his income, and his failure to maintain adequate records, the unexplained bank deposits indicate fraudulent intent.Page: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011