- 42 -
section 6654 where the document purporting to be a return was
filed before the notice of deficiency was issued. See, e.g.,
Turco v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-564; Morgan v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1987-184, affd. without published
opinion 869 F.2d 1495 (7th Cir. 1989). However, the Beard test
has not been applied in some circumstances where the statutory
scheme directs a different inquiry. Cabirac v. Commissioner, 120
T.C. 163, 170 (2003) (a return prepared by the Secretary under
section 6020(b) treated as a return filed by the taxpayer for
purposes of determining the addition to tax under section
6651(a)(2)); Spurlock v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-124
(same); Janpol v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 499, 501-502 (1994)
(Beard does not apply in determining period of limitations for
purposes of the tax imposed by section 4975 because section
6501(l)(1) specifically references a return that does not require
all the information mandated under Beard), supplementing 101 T.C.
518 (1993); see also sec. 6103(b) (definition of return for
purposes of confidentiality and disclosure of returns and return
information).
As explained by the majority, the statutory scheme mandates
that a document filed after a notice of deficiency has been
issued is not a return for purposes of section 6654. In future
cases where the statutory scheme does not provide the appropriate
inquiry to be used to determine whether a return was filed, we
Page: Previous 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011