- 4 -
neither give his testimony weight nor use the documents he
submitted as proof.
His severe credibility problems began with his testimony
explaining why he had so few original records. He said that a
broken pipe had flooded the grocery store and destroyed most of
his records. The first time he mentioned the flood, however, was
shortly before trial--he had never mentioned it during his audit.
Even at trial, Mr. Obot testified variously that the flooding
happened in “2000, 2001,” and that he incurred legal fees
sometime in 1999 when “my stuff flooded and his [landlord’s]
insurance was supposed to cover part of that.” He did not file
an insurance claim of his own, didn’t have any proof of filing
one with his landlord, and did not seek a casualty loss deduction
for the flood. After the Commissioner challenged this flood
narrative, the Court specifically invited Mr. Obot to retake the
stand to rebut the Commissioner’s proof. He declined to do so.
Because he offered no evidence besides his say-so that there was
a flood, we conclude that there was no flood.
Then there were the receipts he introduced as proof of
deductible expenses. Even a cursory look showed them to have
been either altered or photocopied in such a way as to obscure
key information. For instance, he introduced a photocopy of a
receipt for the purchase of a cash register that was dated “July
2, 1999” at the top of the document, but “July 2, 1996” at the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011