- 12 -
Apparently recognizing the shortcomings in his documentary
evidence, petitioner seeks to overcome them by his own detailed
and highly self-serving testimony. As a preliminary matter, we
note that petitioner was not a credible witness. As previously
discussed, he is an experienced C.P.A. and self-professed tax
expert who consciously ignored the requirements of the Internal
Revenue Code. He offers many excuses, but no good reason, why
his contemporaneous business records so poorly substantiate his
claimed deductions, and why in fact he omitted the claimed
deductions from his tax returns, only to assert them in niggling
detail years later after being indicted and conceding that he
omitted great sums of gross income.8 The explanations petitioner
has offered-–e.g., that he was motivated by his desire to avoid
detection by various State and Federal authorities who might find
7(...continued)
Federal Rules of Evidence. See sec. 7453; Malinowski v.
Commissioner, 71 T.C. 1120, 1125 (1979). At trial, petitioner
was represented by counsel, who was given ample opportunity to
respond to respondent’s evidentiary objections and to raise
objections of his own regarding evidentiary matters or any other
matter relating to the conduct of the trial.
8 Among petitioner’s many implausible arguments is one that
he believed there was no harm in his omitting the gross income
because he knew, thanks to his tax expertise, that he would have
been entitled to even greater amounts of deductions, if he had
claimed them, that would have eliminated any net tax liability
and in fact would have produced losses for tax purposes. We do
not believe that petitioner would have consciously foregone
claiming such losses. In the course of this proceeding, we have
observed in petitioner no hint of such largesse toward the fisc.
We do observe, however, that petitioner’s continued attempts to
exonerate himself with such ludicrous arguments reflect adversely
on his credibility.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011