David E. Christensen - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          See Boyd v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 305, 320 (2004); Watson v.               
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-29.                                           
               During petitioner’s testimony, he contradicted himself,                
          admitted to errors in the Schedules C relative to expenses, and             
          in some instances could not recall what the claimed expenses                
          were.  Further, petitioner did not make a good faith effort to              
          reconstruct his expenses, provide documentation, or provide                 
          corroborating evidence to bolster the credibility of his                    
          testimony.  See Tokarski v. Commissioner, supra at 77; Smith v.             
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1998-33.  Therefore, the Court finds               
          petitioner’s testimony was insufficient to substantiate his                 
          deductions.  Boyd v. Commissioner, supra; Watson v. Commissioner,           
               Finally, petitioner failed to reconstruct his records,                 
          submit any documentation, or otherwise provide sufficient                   
          evidentiary basis for the Court to estimate his expenses under              
          the Cohan rule.  See Cohan v. Commissioner, 39 F.2d 540, 543-544            
          (2d Cir. 1930); Vanicek v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 731, 742-743               
               Therefore, the Court sustains respondent’s determination               
          disallowing petitioner’s Schedule C expenses of $46,669, $44,451,           
          $44,063, and $39,135 for 1998, 1999, 2000, and 2001,                        
          respectively.  As a result of the above, the Court sustains                 

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011