- 19 -
advised of the consequences of not complying with his obligation
does not excuse his failure to do so.
Petitioner's contention that Mr. Belotz did not advise Mr.
Constantino that a return could have been filed based on
information available during August 1991 also does not establish
that there was reasonable cause for the failure to file timely.
Mr. Constantino was well aware of the due date of the return and
of his responsibility to file it. If Mr. Constantino had
erroneously believed that a return must be complete before it may
be filed, that belief alone would not constitute reasonable cause
for failing to file timely. Niedringhaus v. Commissioner, 99
T.C. 202, 221 (1992). Mr. Belotz' failure to correct that belief
also does not establish reasonable cause. As noted above, a
showing of reasonable cause based on reliance on an adviser must
be premised upon the giving of substantive advice to the
taxpayer, and a taxpayer who has not been given advice has
nothing upon which to reasonably rely. Eastern Inv. Corp. v.
United States, supra at 656; Denenberg v. United States, supra at
307.
At the base of petitioner's arguments with respect to Mr.
Belotz' failure to give advice is the contention that Mr. Belotz
did not work hard enough to get Mr. Constantino to file
petitioner's estate tax return timely. Because the timely filing
of the return was a matter for which Mr. Constantino was
responsible with or without Mr. Belotz' prodding, we find that
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