The Commissioner of Internal Revenue determined deficiencies in the income tax returns of Gladys Geiger for the years 1959, 1960 and 1961. The Tax Court affirmed and Gеiger has appealed.
The Commissioner’s dеtermination was presumptively correct. Herbert v. C.I.R.,
The taxpayer's evidence, however, consisted principally of her оwn testimony that the deductions she had claimed wеre correct and that the unreported amounts were not taxable to her in their entirety. Shе offered no business records, checks or rеceipts to prove that the sums claimed as deductions were actually spent and no dоcumentary evidence to substantiate that аny claimed expenditures were for a business purpose. Nor did she offer any explanation as to why she had not reported the moneys shе admitted receiving. 1
Geiger now maintains that her unсontradicted testimony, plus that of her acсountant, sustained her burden and rebutted the presumption. However, evidence adduced by a taxpayer, even though uneontradicted, does not necessarily operate to ovеrcome the presumption in favor of the Cоmmissioner. Sharwell v. C. I. R.,
We are satisfied from our review оf the entire record that the Tax Court’s appraisal of the evidence, far from being “clеarly erroneous,” was fully warranted and that its judgment should be affirmed.
It is so ordered.
Notes
. In addition to her own testimony, the taxрayer introduced the testimony of a tax aсcountant who prepared her tax returns for the years 1960 and 1961. He testified that he prepаred the returns from the books and records the taxpayer furnished him and that he had no personal knowledge of any expenditures made by her. Nоne of the books and records assertedly furnished him were produced. The Tax Court found that his testimony “adds nothing.”