-20-
similar deficiencies. For example, petitioner testified that
during 1992, he often paid Saleh's rent, utilities, and other
expenses by check, and Saleh reimbursed him in cash. This claim
is allegedly supported by a single check petitioner wrote to
Barnett Bank.19 Petitioner was unable to offer any evidence to
corroborate his claim of the purpose of the check, nor was he
able to produce evidence of a reimbursing cash deposit in the
amount of the check. We find, therefore, that this check does
not corroborate petitioner's claims with respect to the funds
that he claimed are cash reimbursements of checks he wrote on
behalf of others.
Petitioner relies on only his testimony to carry the burden
of proving the source of the balance of his deposits.20 Thus,
the issue is one of credibility wherein we must determine the
extent to which the proffered testimony is believable. See Schad
v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. at 620. It is well established that we
are not required to accept self-serving testimony in the absence
of corroborating evidence. Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, 99 T.C.
19 A check drawn on petitioner's checking account in the
amount of $2,328, made payable to Barnett Bank of Atlanta, was
entered into evidence. Petitioner asserts this check was issued
to pay the balance due on Saleh's automobile.
20 For example, petitioner testified he paid Gibson's
personal bills, as well as her share of the household expenses,
by check, and she reimbursed him in cash. Petitioner estimated
Gibson gave him $300 in cash each week for 17 weeks in 1992 and
for 52 weeks in 1993, all of which he deposited in his accounts.
This testimony is uncorroborated by any evidence.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011