- 17 -
aircraft traveled. One of the columns in the flight logbooks is
entitled “PROCEDURES-MANEUVERS”. Petitioner contends that he
contemporaneously listed the business purpose of each flight in
the flight logbooks by making notations in the PROCEDURES-
MANEUVERS column. Of the approximately 460 flights listed in
petitioner’s flight logbooks, however, only slightly over half
have accompanying notations in the PROCEDURES-MANEUVERS column.
The notations that do exist are generally indecipherable and do
not enable the Court to determine the business purpose of the
subject flights.9 Petitioner’s testimony, whereby he attempts to
supplement or explain the documentary evidence, we do not find
reliable or trustworthy.
Petitioner also offered the testimony of two witnesses,
Cross and Richard Matthews (Matthews) to establish that all of
the flights in his aircraft were for business purposes. We found
the testimony of Cross and Matthews to be vague and evasive in
material respects. In these circumstances, we are not required
to, and do not, accept their testimony. See Ruark v.
Commissioner, 449 F.2d 311, 312 (9th Cir. 1971), affg. per curiam
T.C. Memo. 1969-48; Clark v. Commissioner, 266 F.2d 698, 708-709
(9th Cir. 1959), affg. and remanding on another issue T.C. Memo.
9 The cryptic notations include statements such as “no
heater” or “6 landings”. One notation contains simply a check
mark. Many of the notations are merely names without further
explanation.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011