- 4 -
duration of the alimony payments was 1 year. Petitioner
therefore argues that he was entitled to claim an alimony
deduction of $6,000 on his return.
Respondent disagrees, contending that petitioner has failed
to provide any evidence to show that alimony payments of $6,000
were actually paid to Ms. Katcher during 2002.
At trial, petitioner testified that a total of $6,000 was
taken out from his paychecks during 2002 to satisfy his alimony
obligation under the temporary order. Respondent requested
petitioner to produce pay stubs showing that moneys were taken
out for alimony or a statement from Ms. Katcher acknowledging
receipt of alimony. Petitioner, however, was unable to provide
the requested documentation, claiming that both his former
employer and Ms. Katcher were uncooperative. Therefore, other
than his testimony, petitioner has not offered any evidence to
show that alimony was paid in 2002. Moreover, during this
period, the evidence shows that petitioner did not meet his child
support obligation. The Court is not required to accept
petitioner’s self-serving testimony. Geiger v. Commissioner, 440
F.2d 688 (9th Cir. 1971), affg. per curiam T.C. Memo. 1969-159;
see Shea v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 183, 189 (1999).
Petitioner contends that H&R Block determined that he was
entitled to claim an alimony deduction of $6,000 based on the
documentation that he had presented to them at the time of the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007