- 10 -
return was extended for the maximum period permitted by the
regulations, to August 28, 1991. Petitioner's estate tax return,
however, was not filed until January 24, 1992, almost 5 months
after the extended due date. Petitioner does not dispute that
petitioner's estate tax return was not filed timely, nor does
petitioner take issue with the denial of the second extension
request.1
Section 6651(a)(1) provides that, in the case of failure to
file a tax return on the date prescribed for filing (including
any extension of time for filing), there shall be added to the
tax required to be shown on the return an amount equal to 5
percent of that tax for each month or fraction thereof that the
failure to file continues, not exceeding 25 percent in the
aggregate. The addition to tax is mandatory unless it is shown
that the failure to file timely is due to reasonable cause and
not willful neglect. Sec. 6651(a)(1); Estate of Cavenaugh v.
Commissioner, 100 T.C. 407, 426 (1993), affd. in part and revd.
in part on other grounds 51 F.3d 597 (5th Cir. 1995); Constantino
v. United States, 56 AFTR 2d 85-6551, at 85-6552, 85-2 USTC par.
13,629, at 90,429 (N.D. Cal. 1985).
Reasonable cause for delay is established where a taxpayer
is unable to file timely despite the exercise of ordinary
1 See Estate of La Meres v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 294, 321
n.24 (1992) (citing Estate of Young v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1983-686). Petitioner does not raise any issue concerning the
validity of the regulation.
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