Bill McDonald - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         
               simply because he keeps incomplete records.  The                       
               absence of tax records cannot automatically deprive the                
               Commissioner of a rational foundation for the income                   
               determination.  As the Fifth Circuit recognized in Webb                
               v. C.I.R., 394 F.2d 366, 373 (5th Cir. 1968):                          
                    [T]he absence of adequate tax records does not                    
                    give the Commissioner carte blanche for imposing                  
                    Draconian absolutes ....  [However,] such absence                 
                    does weaken any critique of the Commissioner's                    
                         Arithmetic precision was originally and                      
                    exclusively in [the taxpayer's] hands, and he had                 
                    a statutory duty to provide it ....  [H]aving                     
                    defaulted in his duty, he cannot frustrate the                    
                    Commissioner's reasonable attempts by compelling                  
                    investigation and recomputation under every means                 
                    of income determination.  Nor should he be overly                 
                    chagrined at the Tax Court's reluctance to credit                 
                    every word of his negative wails.                                 
          See also Figueiredo v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 1508 (1970), affd.             
          per order (9th Cir., Mar. 14, 1973); Estate of Mason v.                     
          Commissioner, 64 T.C. 651 (1975), affd. 566 F.2d 2 (6th Cir.                
          1977); Bradford v. Commissioner, 796 F.2d 303 (9th Cir. 1986),              
          affg. T.C. Memo. 1984-601.  Petitioners in this case have not               
          provided records or a more reasonable or accurate method of                 
          reconstructing their income.                                                
               Petitioners attacked respondent’s reconstruction method by             
          arguing that duplication occurred and by testifying that the                
          reconstruction was in error based on petitioners’ recollections             
          that certain clients were charged lesser fees or no fees.                   
          Petitioners, though they are tax professionals, failed to keep              
          adequate records and thus created this situation in which                   
          respondent is unable to specifically verify or reconstruct the              
          fees charged to certain clients or to determine whether, in some            

Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011