- 8 -
file timely would be imposed on the estate because it appeared to
him that the estimated tax payment that had been made when
extension of the initial due date was requested exceeded the
amount of estate tax due from the estate. After the second
extension request was denied, Mr. Constantino did not ask Mr.
Belotz to file petitioner's estate tax return as quickly as
possible, nor did Mr. Constantino do any research concerning the
consequences of filing untimely.
At the time that the second extension request was denied,
Mr. Belotz had sufficient information concerning assets
includable in decedent's estate to prepare the estate tax return,
but lacked information concerning its expenses, which he sought
to obtain from Mr. Constantino. At that time, it did not occur
to Mr. Belotz to file a return based on the information then
available to him.
In a letter to Mr. Blum dated October 1, 1991, Mr. Belotz
complained that Mr. Constantino "has been uncooperative in
submitting the necessary information to prepare the federal and
state tax forms that are overdue." In a letter to Mr.
Constantino dated October 14, 1991, Mr. Belotz wrote that he had
not received the necessary information from Mr. Constantino and
insisted that Mr. Constantino contact him. Mr. Constantino
provided information on expenses at the end of October 1991.
During December 1991, Mr. Belotz requested further information
from Messrs. Constantino and Blum for preparation of petitioner's
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011