Edward W. and Edith M. Arnold - Page 10




                                        -10-                                          
         Helvering, 292 U.S. 435, 440 (1934).  Taxpayers are required to              
         maintain records that are sufficient to enable the Commissioner              
         to determine their correct tax liability.  See sec. 6001; sec.               
         1.6001-1(a), Income Tax Regs.  Additionally, taxpayers bear the              
         burden of substantiating the amount and purpose of the item they             
         claimed as a deduction.  See Hradesky v. Commissioner, 65 T.C.               
         87, 89 (1975), affd. per curiam 540 F.2d 821 (5th Cir. 1976).                
              Petitioners rely on their own testimony to substantiate the             
         claimed expenses and deductions at issue.3  The Court is not                 
         required to accept petitioners’ unsubstantiated testimony.  See              
         Wood v. Commissioner, 338 F.2d 602, 605 (9th Cir. 1964), affg. 41            
         T.C. 593 (1964).  We found petitioners’ testimony to be general,             
         vague, conclusory, and/or questionable in certain material                   
         respects.  On the record, we repeatedly noted Mr. Arnold’s lack              
         of credibility.  Under the circumstances presented herein, we are            
         not required to, and generally do not, rely on petitioners’                  
         testimony to sustain their burden of establishing error in                   
         respondent’s determinations.  See Lerch v. Commissioner, 877 F.2d            
         624, 631-632 (7th Cir. 1989), affg. T.C. Memo. 1987-295; Geiger              
         v. Commissioner, 440 F.2d 688, 689-690 (9th Cir. 1971), affg. per            

               3  Petitioners also may rely on the testimony of William               
          Ray.  Apart from Mr. Ray’s testimony that he was paid $3,122.52             
          for services rendered during 2003, most of Mr. Ray’s testimony              
          was general, vague, and conclusory.  With the exception of the              
          amount he was paid, he generally lacked sufficient knowledge                
          about the items/facts in issue.  Mr. Ray’s testimony is not                 
          sufficient to support petitioners’ assertions.                              






Page:  Previous  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007