- 16 -
income from her ownership of the trucks and their use by other
persons.
We believe petitioner's testimony--in response to the
questions she was asked at trial--literally to be true, but it
does not cover all possible sources of income from the use of her
truck or trucks during the taxable year. Petitioner did not
explain how two Mack trucks were used in her trucking business
during a portion of 1993. Petitioner's testimony does not
exclude the possibility that she drove one truck herself to
provide transportation services for Cappy's and allowed someone
else either to use her truck when she was not driving it,12 or to
use the other truck to provide transportation services for
others, giving rise to rent income rather than earned income.13
In this way, petitioner's testimony that she had no other clients
and that she reported all her earnings would literally be true,
and still fail to rebut the presumption of correctness of
respondent's determination that petitioner had unreported income
from another source whose likely existence is disclosed by the
record.
12 We note that, for the immediately preceding year,
petitioner reported gross receipts of $68,145 from her trucking
business, approximately $24,000 more than she reported for the
taxable year in issue.
13 Petitioner's failure to report the sale of the second
Mack truck raises from another angle the question of whether her
failure to report income was connected to income generated by
other use or rental of the truck that was sold.
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