- 5 -
trial that he did not have the “proper information” and therefore
could not file a tax return for 1993. In support of that claim,
petitioner relied on his general, conclusory, and uncorroborated
testimony. We are unwilling to rely on that testimony. Assuming
arguendo that we were to accept petitioner’s testimony about why
he failed to file a tax return for the year at issue, the un-
availability of information or records does not necessarily
establish reasonable cause for failure to file timely a tax
return. See Elec. & Neon, Inc. v. Commissioner, 56 T.C. 1324,
1342-1343 (1971), affd. without published opinion 496 F.2d 876
(5th Cir. 1974). A taxpayer is required to file timely based
upon the best information available and to file thereafter an
amended return if necessary. Estate of Vriniotis v. Commis-
sioner, 79 T.C. 298, 311 (1982). On the record before us, we
find that petitioner has not met his burden of proving that he is
not liable for the year at issue for the addition to tax under
section 6651(a)(1).
With respect to section 6654(a), petitioner does not dispute
that he did not pay estimated tax for the year at issue. Assum-
ing arguendo that respondent’s examination of the year at issue
began after July 22, 1998, we find that respondent has satisfied
respondent’s burden of production under section 7491(c) with
respect to respondent’s determination under section 6654(a).
Petitioner claimed at trial that his failure to make esti-
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011