- 24 -
assertions by some of the witnesses that they attended meals with
petitioner, the testimony did not provide an adequate description
of the circumstances surrounding any of the meals. Not only was
there a total failure of direct evidence to corroborate
petitioner’s statement as to cost, time, place, and date, but
some of the witnesses’ testimony directly contradicted at least
some of petitioner’s statements. See supra the discussion of
Mercer’s, Wright’s, and Sullivan’s testimony.
Thus, we conclude, and we have found, that the record does
not include “sufficient evidence” of corroboration for purposes
of section 274(d) and section 1.274-5T(c)(3), Temporary Income
Tax Regs.
Petitioner argues that he should not be held to strict
compliance with section 274(d), because important records have
become unavailable. The records that petitioner claims are
unavailable are the Crabtree Dealerships’ records of who bought
automobiles from the Crabtree Dealerships during 1987.
Petitioner contends that he is unable to obtain those records
because the Crabtree Dealerships were sold sometimes after 1987.
Section 1.274-5T(c)(5), Temporary Income Tax Regs., provides
that if records have become unavailable through no fault of the
taxpayer, then the taxpayer is permitted “to substantiate a
deduction by reasonable reconstruction of his expenditures”. In
order to qualify for relief under this provision, petitioner must
establish that (1) at one time he possessed adequate records and
Page: Previous 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011