- 4 -
with Ms. Corona until mid-1998 or possibly after the end of the
year. Petitioner also testified that Cathy lived with petitioner
during all of 1997 and all of 1998, and that petitioner supported
Cathy during this time. Ms. Corona, on the other hand, testified
that both Cathy and Jose lived with her and were supported by her
starting in September 1997 and throughout 1998.
We do not find petitioner to be a credible witness because
by admitting that Jose did not live with him throughout all of
1997 and 1998, as indicated on his tax returns, he has admitted
that he provided false information on those returns.
Furthermore, petitioner’s testimony was contradicted by the
testimony of Ms. Corona, whom we find to be a more credible
witness. We therefore accept Ms. Corona’s version of events.
We find that Jose and Cathy lived with petitioner only until
August 1997, and that they lived with and were supported by Ms.
Corona after that time. Petitioner is not entitled to a
dependency exemption deduction for either Cathy or Jose in 1998,
because they were not supported by him during that year. Sec.
152(a). Petitioner likewise is not entitled to a dependency
exemption deduction for either Cathy or Jose in 1997: We do not
accept petitioner’s testimony that he supported the children
during 1997 for the reasons stated above and because petitioner’s
income level of $9,337 indicates the children likely had other
sources of income. Because petitioner is not entitled to the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011