- 76 -
Mr. Sutton’s Testimony
We do not believe that Mr. Sutton had personal knowledge of
the facts surrounding the items which were reported in the joint
returns of petitioner and Ms. Brodsky for the years at issue and
about which he testified at the further trial in this case. In
this connection, Mr. Sutton acknowledged that certain of the
items that were reported in the joint returns for 1991 and 1992
were based upon summary documents that he did not prepare. In
addition, Mr. Sutton misrepresented during his testimony what
documents he had shown to respondent’s counsel and one of respon-
dent’s revenue agents sometime during the week before the further
trial in this case. It was only upon questioning by respondent’s
counsel and by the Court that Mr. Sutton acknowledged that he had
made such a misrepresentation.
Mr. Guterman’s Testimony
Based on our observation of Mr. Guterman at the further
trial, including our observation of his demeanor, we did not find
him to be credible. In addition, although Mr. Guterman claimed
to have personal knowledge with respect to each of the matters
about which he testified, we have serious reservations about that
claim.26
26Mr. Guterman admitted that his testimony with respect to
at least one document was based upon the representations of
petitioner as to that document, and not on his personal knowl-
edge.
Page: Previous 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011