- 15 -
Whiting v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1975-38.
Moreover, we do not comprehend how petitioner could have had
an adjusted basis of $12,670 in “professional research”. Any
costs that petitioner had incurred in producing such “research”
would have been expensed on a Schedule C and/or billed to his
clients.
Finally, we are not convinced that any of petitioner’s
property was either stolen or damaged by water. See Diaz v.
Commissioner, 58 T.C. 560, 564 (1972) (distilling truth from the
testimony of witnesses, whose demeanor we observe and whose
credibility we evaluate, is “the daily grist of judicial life”);
Kropp v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-148 (“As a trier of fact,
it is our duty to listen to the testimony, observe the demeanor
of the witnesses, weigh the evidence, and determine what we
believe.”). Significantly, petitioner failed to introduce a copy
of the police report that he allegedly filed; likewise,
petitioner failed to introduce a copy of the civil complaint that
he allegedly filed against the owner of the garage. Documents
such as these should have been readily obtainable; indeed,
petitioner implied that they were in his possession.
Petitioner’s failure to introduce them justifies a negative
inference. See Recklitis v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 874, 890
(1988); Pollack v. Commissioner, 47 T.C. 92, 108 (1966), affd.
392 F.2d 409 (5th Cir. 1968); Wichita Terminal Elevator Co. v.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011