Craig D. Hollingsworth - Page 8




                                        - 7 -                                         
              In view of his failure to substantiate, we hold that                    
         petitioner is not entitled to the deductions claimed by him on               
         his Schedule C.                                                              
              B.  Addition To Tax Under Section 6651(a)(1)                            
              Section 6651(a)(1) imposes an addition to tax for failure to            
         timely file a return.  Whether petitioner is liable for this                 
         addition turns on whether he timely filed his 1998 income tax                
         return.                                                                      
              Absent an extension of time to file, petitioner’s 1998                  
         income tax return was required to be filed by Thursday, April 15,            
         1999.  See sec. 6072(a).  Because petitioner filed Form 4868,                
         Application for Automatic Extension of Time To File U.S.                     
         Individual Income Tax Return, the time within which petitioner               
         was required to file his return was extended by 4 months.4  Thus,            
         the filing deadline became August 15, 1999.  But because that                


              3(...continued)                                                         
           F.3d     (8th Cir. 2001).  In other words, petitioner may not              
          avoid meeting his burden of proof by asserting that he has a                
          right not to testify.  United States v. Rylander, supra at 761;             
          Traficant v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 501, 504 (1987), affd. 884               
          F.2d 258 (6th Cir. 1989).  Indeed, in a civil case, “the Court              
          may draw a negative inference from facts over which petitioner              
          has asserted his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-                    
          incrimination.”  Traficant v. Commissioner, supra, citing Baxter            
          v. Palmigiano, 425 U.S. 308 (1976).  The negative inference that            
          we would draw in this case is that petitioner lacks                         
          substantiation for the deductions that he claimed on his return.            
               4 At trial, respondent raised no issue regarding the                   
          timeliness of Form 4868 or whether petitioner properly estimated            
          his tax liability thereon.  See Crocker v. Commissioner, 92 T.C.            
          899, 910 (1989).  Accordingly, we proceed on the basis that Form            
          4868 was both timely filed and valid.                                       




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011