- 14 -
Specifically, the first week of September (beginning with
Saturday, September 1st), has entries starting on Tuesday of that
week (which would have actually been Tuesday, August 28th). The
entry for “Wednesday” of this ‘added’ week reads: “In Focus Bk -
3 hrs.” To reconcile the possibility that this “added” day was
not the same as the corresponding last Wednesday in August, we
turned to the entry for Wednesday, August 28th which reads:
“Exposure Bk - 4 hrs.” We further note additional “added” days
and entries to the first week of the November calendar page that
do not correspond to the actual days and entries recorded on the
October calendar.4 Because there is more than one instance of
these “added” days, we do not believe that the calendar is an
accurate and truthful account of the time spent by petitioners in
cultivation of a business.
Mr. Storer stressed that he did not take any vacation, and
that “for religious reasons” observed neither any religious nor
Federal holidays, which allowed him those days to work on his
photography. Mr. Storer testified that he “used [all holidays]
to market his business, process orders, and make sales.” The
2001 calendar, however, shows no activity recorded on April 15
4 On the November calendar page petitioners “inserted” 2
days at the beginning of the month, a Tuesday and a Wednesday,
that did not actually exist. Again, the entries recorded on
these “added” days also do not correspond with the entries listed
for the last 2 days of October.
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007