- 6 - that he did not need to worry about the filing. This was not true. The reason for this misinformation being given is not known, but it is believed to be a combination of the illness and old age of the accountant. When the new accountant became aware that the proper steps to timely file the return had not been taken, he immediately took steps to hand deliver checks for the estimated amount due to the IRS, which amount can be seen in the return. The money to pay the estimate was always available, and if the true facts had been known, the money would have been paid in a timely fashion. As it turns out, there was an underestimate paid because of incomplete information available at the time, and there is a balance due on the return, but the estimate made at the time was a good faith estimate based on the available information. The fact that additional information kept coming to light after this estimate is also the reason that the return took so long to complete. The Commissioner assessed the amount of tax shown on the return, and assessed the following additions to tax: $67.135.73 for untimely filing under section 6651(a)(1) and $9,981.58 for untimely payment under section 6651(a)(2). The addition to tax under section 6651(a)(2) is computed as follows: 4 months x .5% x $225,400 = $4,508.00 15 months x .5% x $72,981 = 5,473.58 9,981.58 On April 21, 1997, the Commissioner issued to the estate a notice of deficiency listing a $9,716 deficiency and a $2,429 addition thereto under section 6651(a)(1). OPINION We must decide whether the estate is liable for the additions to tax determined by respondent under section 6651(a)(1) and (2), bearing in mind that the estate has thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011