- 46 -
3-year period merely because his mind was not on business.52 We
find petitioner’s defense of personal tragedy misplaced.
Petitioner was sufficiently focused and cognizant to, inter alia,
open and operate numerous businesses during the relevant period,
engage in significant investment activities, engage the
assistance of trained accounting professionals, and earn and
deposit significant sums of money into his numerous bank
accounts.
In support of our finding of fraud, we outline pertinent
portions of the record:
(1) Petitioner sold his interest in Tri-City and Newark
Wreckers for which he received $200,000 and was relieved of
substantial indebtedness. To this day, petitioner has failed to
report this transaction.53
52In Otsuki v. Commissioner, supra at 110, the taxpayer
advanced, and we rejected a similar argument. The taxpayer was
too busy and too tired to maintain adequate business records.
53Petitioner admits on brief, that he failed to report a net
gain from the sale of between $17,247 and $118,247. This, of
course, is after inclusion of $41,105 in additional income for
1990, which accordingly, increased his basis in the Tri-City
partnership. Thus, before respondent’s examination and
redetermination of Tri-City’s 1990 income, it was reasonable for
petitioner to assume that he had substantially more net gain (at
least $41,105 more) from the sale of Tri-City, which he never
reported.
Petitioner seeks solace in a statement that his accountant
prepared, which he attached to his 1990 return. We find this
statement, given the specific circumstances of this case, at the
(continued...)
Page: Previous 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011