- 10 -
the estate’s claim that the failure to timely file was due to
reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect, or the estate’s
alternative argument that the assessed addition to tax
constitutes an excessive fine in violation of the Eighth
Amendment of the United States Constitution.
We have considered the estate’s other arguments for a
contrary holding14 and, to the extent not discussed herein, find
them to be without merit.
Accordingly, respondent’s motion for entry of decision will
be granted.
An appropriate order and
decision will be entered.
13(...continued)
decide the same issue in the case of an overpayment. See, e.g.,
Judge v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1175, 1180-1187 (1987). In this
regard, the estate does not claim that it overpaid this addition,
and we are unable to find that it did.
14 In support of its argument that we have jurisdiction
over the assessed addition to tax, the estate cites our opinion
in Hannan v. Commissioner, 52 T.C. 787, 791 (1969), in which we
stated that “it is not the existence of a deficiency but the
Commissioner’s determination of a deficiency that provides a
predicate for Tax Court jurisdiction.” However, in Estate of
Young v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 879, 886-887 (1983), we held that
Hannan was inapposite to the case where the addition to tax is
attributable to the amount shown as tax by the taxpayer on the
return. Our opinion in Hannan therefore does not support the
estate’s argument.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Last modified: May 25, 2011