- 30 - existence of the Seabrook Properties account, he summonsed the bank records with respect to that account. When Mr. Kaply received the bank records for the Indian Head business savings account, he discovered that, contrary to what petitioners had told him at the September 1989 meeting, petition- ers had deposited directly into that account checks that they had received from clients of Design Consultants. Mr. Kaply then decided to do an analysis under the bank deposits method to determine whether petitioners had unreported income for 1987, and, if so, in what amount. Based on that analysis and his investigation, Mr. Kaply determined that petitioners had approxi- mately $750,000 of unreported income for 1987. On February 14, 1990, Mr. Kaply telephoned Mr. Dennett (February 1990 telephone call) to schedule another meeting with petitioners. Mr. Dennett informed Mr. Kaply during the February 1990 telephone call that petitioners wanted Mr. Dennett to meet alone with Mr. Kaply and that they did not intend to attend future meetings. When Mr. Kaply advised Mr. Dennett during the February 1990 telephone call about the amount of income that he had determined petitioners failed to report for 1987, Mr. Dennett told Mr. Kaply that he would contact petitioners about meeting with Mr. Kaply. During the February 1990 telephone call, Mr. 12(...continued) bank accounts, if any, were maintained by petitioners at Hampton Co-operative Bank. The record shows only that petitioners obtained two mortgage loans from that bank.Page: Previous 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011