- 16 -
due date for filing the estate tax return, reliance on that
advice certainly was neither reasonable nor in good faith after
Mr. Constantino learned that the Service had denied the second
extension request. Hopping v. United States, 69 AFTR 2d 92-1464,
at 92-1474, 92-1 USTC par. 60,098, at 84,272 (S.D. Ind. 1992);
see also United States v. Kroll, 547 F.2d 393, 396 (7th Cir.
1977); Estate of DiRezza v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 19, 34-35
(1982) (reliance on adviser not reasonable where executor learns
that return is past due). Accordingly, Mr. Belotz' advice could
not furnish reasonable cause for the failure to file the estate
tax return during the more than 4-month period subsequent to the
time that Mr. Constantino learned that the second extension
request had been denied and that the return was overdue.
Additionally, Messrs. Belotz and Constantino delayed
submission of the second extension request until the end of the
extended period allowed for filing the return. The letter
requesting the second extension was dated August 27, 1991, 1 day
before the extended due date, and was received by the Service on
August 30, 1991. Even assuming that it was possible that the
Service would grant the second extension request, it was almost
4 (...continued)
774 (8th Cir. 1993); Irby v. Commissioner, 30 T.C. 1166, 1176
(1958), affd. per curiam 274 F.2d 208 (5th Cir. 1960); cf.
Freytag v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 849, 888-889 (1987), affd. 904
F.2d 1011 (5th Cir. 1990), affd. 501 U.S. 868 (1991) (reliance on
adviser must be reasonable in order to show underpayment of tax
is not attributable to negligence).
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011