- 16 -
the bank deposits analysis would have likely addressed any such
inclusion. To the extent any cash from check cashing was a part
of the bank deposits analysis, it is unlikely that it is
attributable to cash gifts from petitioner’s parents.
We find the testimony offered on this point by petitioners
and their relatives to be self-serving, vague, and
uncorroborated. Petitioner’s parents could not recall the
incremental amounts, dates, or total amount allegedly given to
petitioners and/or infused into Gene’s operation. No gift tax
returns were filed by petitioner’s parents, and no record exists
of the alleged transfers. Additionally, during the years under
consideration, petitioner supported his father and mother, both
of whom worked at Gene’s and lived under petitioners’ roof. In
the absence of persuasive evidence and reliable corroboration, we
are not required to accept the self-serving testimony of
interested parties. See Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 77
(1986).
Petitioners, in an attempt to discredit respondent’s
reconstruction, offered their own reconstruction of income using
the percentage markup method. They maintain that the percentage
markup method of reconstructing income would more accurately
reflect petitioners’ income for the years in issue. In
particular, petitioners argue that a large percentage of the
checks deposited and included in respondent’s bank deposits
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011