- 7 - reasonable and ordinarily prudent person would do under the circumstances." Neely v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 934, 947 (1985). The accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a) does not apply to any portion of an underpayment if it is shown that there was reasonable cause for such portion and that the taxpayer acted in good faith. See sec. 6664(c)(1). In this case, petitioners were negligent. For each of the taxable years in issue, petitioners failed to report interest income, Schedule C income, and rental income. In addition, petitioners failed to maintain adequate records to substantiate Schedule C expenses and rental deductions claimed on their return. Thus, the record adequately demonstrates that petitioners were "careless" and did not make a "reasonable" attempt to comply with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. By Mr. Terrell's testimony, petitioners contend that they are not liable for the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(a) for any of the years in issue because they relied on their tax return preparer, Mr. Still, to prepare their returns accurately. In the circumstances petitioners' responsibility of filing accurate tax returns "cannot be avoided by placing responsibility on an agent." Pritchett v. Commissioner, 63 T.C. 149, 174 (1974). In the case of alleged reliance upon an accountant who prepared the taxpayer's return, a taxpayer mayPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011