- 11 - rollover was not accomplished within the requisite 60 days. See also Eagan v. United States, 80 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 1996). A taxpayer's approach to reporting of an item on a tax return can be accepted as a representation that facts exist that are consistent with the manner of reporting. Estate of Letts v. Commissioner, supra. On her 1990 return, decedent reported that the entire amount of the 1990 pension distribution was timely rolled over into an eligible retirement plan and that the taxable portion of the pension distribution was zero. Although decedent did not report the date of receipt of the pension distribution or the date of the rollover, she represented that facts existed to support the tax-deferred rollover treatment of the pension distribution. (2) Respondent’s Reliance or Acquiescence of the Item Reported for 1990 The Commissioner acquiesces or relies on a representation of the taxpayer when the taxpayer files a return that contains an inadequately disclosed item and respondent accepts that return and allows the period of limitations to expire without an audit of that return. Herrington v. Commissioner, supra; Mayfair Minerals, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 91; see Spencer Med. Associates v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-130; Hughes & Luce, L.L.P. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-559, affd. on another issue 70 F.3d 16 (5th Cir. 1995). Respondent cannot rely on a representation made by a taxpayer if the taxpayer has providedPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011