- 23 - Klovanish testified that petitioner’s records for the years at issue were in an “organized condition” and, with the exception of 1 year, corresponded with petitioner’s tax returns.21 Although we are satisfied that petitioner kept books and records of his mining activities during the years at issue, we are not convinced that petitioner’s record keeping represented anything other than an effort to maintain substantiation of the expenses claimed on his returns or that his record keeping was businesslike. As we have stated: The purpose of maintaining books and records is more than to memorialize for tax purposes the existence of the subject transactions; it is to facilitate a means of periodically determining profitability and analyzing expenses such that proper cost saving measures might be implemented in a timely and efficient manner. * * * [Burger v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1985-523 (citing Golanty v. Commissioner, 72 T.C. at 430).] See also Steele v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-63 (checks served as adequate substantiation for claimed expenses but were not businesslike records). In this case, petitioner has made no showing that he kept the kinds of books and records that would have enabled him to evaluate the financial condition of his mining activities. It 21Mr. Klovanish could not tie some of the numbers on petitioner’s tax return for 1 year to petitioner’s records but suggested that this might be due to the fact that he did not have information from petitioner’s prior accountant to ascertain what adjustments the prior accountant had made in preparing the tax return.Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011