- 7 -
The fact that Mr. Huff testified that he mailed the 1997
Form 1040 and the 1997 Form 4868 to respondent in the same
envelope also undercuts his testimony that he filed the Form 4868
simply out of concern that the Form 1040 would not be postmarked
timely. A request for an automatic extension of time to file a
tax return must be filed before the unextended due date of that
return. See sec. 1.6081-4(a)(3), Income Tax Regs. We are hard
pressed to understand how an attorney such as Mr. Huff could have
expected or perceived that two documents mailed to respondent in
the same envelope would be treated by respondent as filed on
different dates. We also are hard pressed to understand why, if
Mr. Huff had prepared the 1997 Form 4868 immediately after he
completed the 1997 Form 1040, as he testified, petitioners typed
almost all of the information on the 1997 Form 1040 but hand
wrote the minimal information reported on the 1997 Form 4868. We
also note that although Mr. Huff indicated during his testimony
that petitioner Lucy C. Huff could corroborate his assertion that
he had filed their 1997 tax return late on the evening of
April 15, 1998, he neither called her to testify under oath as to
this matter nor offered a valid explanation as to why she was
unavailable to testify. We can only assume that petitioner Lucy
C. Huff’s testimony as to this matter would have been unfavorable
to petitioners’ case. See, e.g., Wichita Terminal Elevator Co.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011