-16- passed on January 31, 1990, for us to find that their ownership preceded that date. Thus, petitioners do not qualify under section 121(a)(2). B. Whether Petitioners Are Liable for the Addition to Tax Under Section 6651(a)(1) for Failure To File Timely Section 6651(a)(1) imposes an addition to tax of up to 25 percent for failure to file timely Federal income tax returns unless the taxpayer shows that such failure was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect. United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241, 245 (1985). To prove "reasonable cause", a taxpayer must show that he exercised ordinary business care and prudence and was nevertheless unable to file the return within the prescribed time. Crocker v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 899, 913 (1989); sec. 301.6651-1(c)(1), Proced. & Admin. Regs. Petitioners' 1992 return was due October 15, 1993. Petitioners filed their 1992 return on July 25, 1994. Petitioners argue that they had reasonable cause to file their 1992 return late because they thought that Schmitz had requested an extension of time to file. A failure to file is due to reasonable cause if the taxpayers exercised ordinary business care, but could not, nevertheless, file their return by the deadline prescribed by law. United States v. Boyle, supra at 246; Bank of the West v. Commissioner, supra at 471. Mr. Blanton testified that Schmitz told him that requests for extensions had been filed. Two extensions were filed regarding petitioners' 1992 return which extended the due date toPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011