Debra Anne Banderas - Page 24

                                       - 24 -                                         
          bearing striking similarity to the exhibits not admitted at trial           
          (with the income and expense listings now bearing two columns,              
          one labeled November 14, 2005, and the other labeled February               
          2005).  However, the tables incorporate noticeably more detail              
          and precision than can reasonably be gleaned from petitioner’s              
          often generalized approximations from the stand.                            
               It is the status of the record as just described that                  
          precipitated the Court’s comment that the outcome of the case is            
          unaffected regardless of any proffered information considered in            
          augmentation of the administrative record.  The complete dearth             
          of any documentation to corroborate or substantiate the figures             
          renders petitioner’s various estimates unpersuasive in any event.           
          Moreover, the Court would observe that only the computations                
          purporting to detail income and expenses as of February 2005 show           
          an excess of expenses over income, and it is decidedly                      
          questionable whether all of those expenses shown are properly               
          taken into account for purposes of section 301.6343-1(b)(4),                
          Proced. & Admin. Regs. (for example, charitable contributions and           
          payments on various liabilities).                                           
               The Court is therefore constrained to conclude that                    
          petitioner has failed to establish economic hardship within the             
          meaning of Rev. Proc. 2003-61, sec. 4.02, 2003-2 C.B. at 298.               
          Accordingly, on account of failure to satisfy two of the three              
          elements enumerated as delineating those circumstances in which             

Page:  Previous  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007