- 29 -
February 3, 1967. The taxpayer presented no evidence other than
his self-serving denials of his involvement. However, the record
contained no evidence of the taxpayer's involvement in the
lottery prior to August 5, 1966. The Court of Appeals for the
Third Circuit stated:
some evidence must appear which would support an
inference of the taxpayer's involvement in gambling
activity during the period covered by the assessment.
Without that evidentiary foundation, minimal though if
[sic] may be, an assessment may not be supported even
where the taxpayer is silent. [Citation omitted.]
Id. at 554. Accordingly, the taxpayer was held to be not liable
for the portion of the deficiency attributed to the period prior
to August 5, 1966.
As we review each of respondent's assertions concerning each
respective search, we consider whether respondent has presented
predicate evidence linking the specific petitioner to the tax-
generating activity from which respondent asserts income has
arisen for such petitioner. Where there is no such predicate
evidence, we attribute no income to that petitioner. Id. Where
the record provides some evidence that a particular petitioner
received income on a particular occasion, but that evidence is
sparse or conflicting as to the amount of the income, we charge
the respective petitioner with an amount of income based on the
record as a whole. Cannon v. Commissioner, 533 F.2d 959, 960-961
(5th Cir. 1976), affg. Ash v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1974-219;
Arouth v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-679; Puppe v.
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011