Maria E. Magallon - Page 9

                                        - 8 -                                         
          however, did not show that there was a large balance forward from           
          2001 that could be used to pay for expenses in 2002.  Petitioner            
          claims that there was no large balance forward in her bank                  
          account because shortly after she deposited the checks from                 
          Jackson Rancheria, she withdrew the money.  As part of the                  
          initial audit questions, TCO Martin had asked whether petitioner            
          had cash on hand outside of her bank accounts.  Petitioner’s                
          representative at that time gave no indication that petitioner              
          had a “cash hoard”.                                                         
               It is well established that the Court is not required to               
          accept petitioner’s self-serving testimony in the absence of                
          corroborating evidence.  See Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, 99               
          T.C. 202, 219 (1992); Tokarski v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 74, 77              
          (1986).  Moreover, petitioner has the burden of proof.  See Rule            
          142(a).  Petitioner’s uncorroborated testimony is insufficient to           
          convince the Court she used her excess 2001 winnings rather than            
          unreported gross receipts from her flea market sales to pay for             
          her gambling losses in 2002.                                                
               Petitioner did not raise any issues with respect to the                
          remaining income and expense items that TCO Martin used in his              
          cash T analysis.                                                            
               Accordingly, the Court accepts respondent’s conclusion from            
          his cash T analysis that petitioner had excess expenditures of              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011