- 5 -
that we have jurisdiction in this proceeding. See sec.
6330(d)(1).
The notice of determination set forth in detail the
application of the various amounts paid by petitioner and those
that were not credited to petitioner’s account because of late
filing of his returns. No other issues have been raised.
Because the validity of the underlying tax liability, i.e.,
the amount unpaid after application of credits to which
petitioner is entitled, is properly at issue, we review
respondent’s determination de novo. See Goza v. Commissioner,
114 T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000).
Petitioner does not dispute that his returns for 1990, 1991,
1992, and 1993 were filed more than 3 years after they were due.
He contends, however, that it is unjust for the Internal Revenue
Service to fail to apply all of his overpayments to his
outstanding tax liabilities because he consistently paid his
taxes early by not claiming refunds of excess withholding until
the time that he belatedly filed his returns. Although he refers
in his testimony to his mother’s death in March 1992 and to his
father’s death in April 1993, he offers no bona fide excuse for
his failure to file timely returns starting with the return for
1989 due in 1990. It appears that sometime prior to April 15,
1990, he made a deliberate decision not to file his returns until
“the three-year window of time” for claiming refunds or credits
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011