- 15 -
indicates that petitioner used these funds deposited into this
corporate account for personal purposes.
Total deposits of $218,257 and $113,935, respectively for
1988 and 1989, into petitioner's accounts at Utah Central Credit
Union that respondent, on brief, seeks to add to his
determination of petitioner's additional income under the bank
deposits method of proof, were not properly raised by respondent
by answer or by motion, and we decline to allow respondent to
raise these deposits for the first time on brief. Rule 41.
Because specific items of income that we charge to
petitioner herein could have been the source of unexplained
deposits into petitioner's bank accounts, to the extent
respondent has not credited against total unexplained bank
deposits charged as income to petitioner the specific items of
income that we charge to petitioner under the specific item
method of proof (other than the $145,430 and $44,100 for 1987 and
1988, respectively, that we charge to petitioner as specific
items of income arising from checks not deposited into
petitioner's bank accounts), petitioner, in the Rule 155
computation, is to be given credit therefor.
With regard to petitioner's claim that he incurred
substantial additional losses and expenses in each year that the
Court should allow as additional business expenses, we have found
that petitioner has established that he paid $17,488 in 1986,
$121,190 in 1987, and $30,100 in 1988 in business expenses from
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011