- 41 -
cattle activity during the years in issue. Accordingly,
respondent’s determination to disallow the losses attributable to
petitioners’ cattle activity under section 183 is not sustained.
II. Addition to Tax for Failure To File Timely Under Section
6651 and Accuracy-Related Penalties Under Section 6662
Respondent determined that petitioners are liable for the
section 6651(a) addition to tax for failing to file a timely
return for 1990. This addition to tax does not apply if the
taxpayer proves that the failure to file timely was: (1) Due to
reasonable cause, and (2) not due to willful neglect. Sec.
6651(a)(1); Rule 142(a)(1); United States v. Boyle, 469 U.S. 241
245 (1985); Peacock v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-122.
There is no dispute that the due date for petitioners’ 1990
return was October 15, 1991, and that it was received on October
28, 1991. Petitioners argue that they had reasonable cause for
untimely filing because they relied on their accountant to file
their return. Reliance on an agent, however, does not constitute
reasonable cause for a late filing under section 6651(a)(1).
United States v. Boyle, supra at 252; Stolz v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1999-404. In the absence of any other argument or evidence
establishing reasonable cause, we sustain respondent’s
determination under section 6651(a)(1) for 1990; petitioners
conceded various adjustments for that year which would result in
a deficiency, in addition to any deficiency resulting from our
Page: Previous 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011