Rodney L. Burr - Page 18




                                       - 18 -                                         
          6651(g).5  Respondent has neither presented any evidence nor made           
          any argument that a substitute return under section 6020(b)                 
          exists with respect to petitioner’s 1996 tax year.  Accordingly,            
          respondent has failed to meet his burden of production with                 
          respect to the addition to tax for failure to pay for 1996.  See            
          Heisey v. Commissioner, supra.  The determination that petitioner           
          is liable for the addition for failure to pay for 1996 is not               
          sustained.                                                                  
               Respondent having met his burden of production with respect            
          to the additions for failure to file, petitioner bears the burden           
          of proving that he had reasonable cause for his failure.  A                 
          failure to file timely returns is generally considered due to               
          reasonable cause where a taxpayer is unable to file the return              
          within the prescribed time despite exercising ordinary business             
          care and prudence.  Estate of Eddy v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 135,           
          141 (2000); sec. 301.6651-1(c)(1), Proced. & Admin. Regs.                   
               Petitioner argues that his failure to file timely returns              
          for the years at issue was due to reasonable cause arising from             
          his work-related relocation in 1994.  Petitioner’s argument, as             
          we understand it, is that he did not file timely returns for 1995           
          or 1996 because he did not think that those returns could be                
          completed accurately until his 1994 return was filed.  Petitioner           

               5Respondent has not argued that the delinquent return filed            
          by petitioner with respect to 1996 constitutes a return for                 
          purposes of the addition to tax for failure to pay.                         





Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011