The AAT has found that a taxpayer has failed to satisfy the burden of proving that amended assessments issued to him for the 2000 to 2002 years were excessive.
The assessments were made on the basis that the taxpayer had understated his income by some $190,000, $243,000 and $169,000 in each of those years, and that he had incorrectly claimed motor vehicle expenses due to an improperly kept logbook. The taxpayer claimed that the understatement of his income was due to gambling receipts, and that the termination of his employment had meant that he could not obtain his original log book for the purposes of the motor vehicle expense claims.
However, in finding that the taxpayer had not established the burden of proving that the assessments were excessive, the AAT first stated that there was no obligation on the part of the Commissioner to put forward material establishing a particular view. It then found that the taxpayer had not demonstrated there was any flaw in either the T-Account Method or the Player Rating Transaction Reports obtained from the casino that the Commissioner had relied on. It also had concerns with certain aspects of the taxpayer’s evidence, especially in relation to motor vehicle claims.
Finally, the AAT found that it was appropriate to maintain the 50% shortfall penalties imposed for recklessness.
(AAT Case [2012] AATA 449, Re Armirthalingam and FCT, AAT, Ref Nos 2009/5855-5857, Forgie DP, 17 July 2012.)
[LTN 139, 20/7]