- 10 -
(citing Morton v. Ruiz, 415 U.S. 199 (1974)), affd. 7 F.3d 447
(5th Cir. 1993). The regulation is not contrary to the language
of any statute governing the filing of tax returns. Furthermore,
respondent has a definite interest in the manner of the execution
of tax returns. It affects, as here, the period of limitations.
Furthermore, as noted supra, returns must be verified under
penalties of perjury. See sec. 6065. Criminal liabilities are
affixed to the jurat on tax returns. See, e.g., sec. 7206(1).
The requirements of section 1.6012-1(a)(5), Income Tax Regs.,
ensure that both the civil and criminal liabilities are not
circumvented. Under these circumstances we cannot say that the
provisions of section 1.6012-1(a)(5), Income Tax Regs., are
arbitrary, capricious, or contrary to the statutory provisions,
and we hold that the regulation is valid.
The execution of the Form 1040 by Mr. Trader in October 1991
did not comply with section 1.6012-1(a)(5), Income Tax Regs.
Accordingly, the notice of deficiency was issued within the 3-
year period, and respondent was not barred by the statute of
limitations from issuing the notice of deficiency for
petitioner's 1990 taxable year.
2. Addition to Tax Under Section 6651(a)(1)
Section 6651(a) imposes an addition to tax for failing to
file a timely income tax return, unless such failure to file is
due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. The
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011