- 59 -
file the estate tax return was due to reasonable cause. See Id.
at 324.
In the instant case, we note that Hinz did not ask Christy
whether the requested extension was approved and what was the new
due date. Hinz merely let time pass until Christy finally got in
touch with him. Christy did not understand that his task was
merely that of legal adviser--he did not promptly notify Hinz,
and, when he did get around to notifying Hinz, he did not bother
to send a copy of the returned Form 4768 to Hinz. The foregoing
leads us to conclude, and we have found, that Hinz delegated to
Christy the task of filing a timely tax return, precisely the
wrong side of the Boyle “bright line”.
We have examined the original Form 4768 in light of
petitioner’s contention, and Christy’s testimony, that Christy’s
misunderstanding of the due date was due to the combination of
respondent’s alleged sloppiness and Christy’s diminishing
eyesight. We can see why Christy might well have been puzzled by
certain of the notations on the returned Form 4768, some of the
notations being quite faint or otherwise unclear. However, we do
not see how any reasonable interpretation of the notations would
lead anyone to conclude that (1) the approved extended due dates
were the same for both filing and paying, or (2) the approved
extended due date for filing was in 1994. Apparently, petitioner
means to suggest that Hinz’s failure to file timely should be
Page: Previous 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011