- 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