- 3 -
draft return, together with a letter dated April 4, 1996, to
respondent.
Petitioners no longer have a copy of the so-called draft
return. However, at trial, petitioners introduced a copy of the
April 4, 1996 letter that allegedly accompanied the so-called
draft return.
Petitioner’s April 4, 1996 letter stated, in part as
follows:
Our tax return for the tax year 1995 is being
filed using TurboTax software and the return is printed
using the program. The enclosed return is submitted,
although there appears to be a flaw in the program that
prevents us from representing operating losses for 1995
and working these losses into the calculations for
correctly determining our tax obligations. * * * But we
know we have sustained significant operating losses
during 1995 and are now attempting to accurately
ascertain their value and declare our intention to
carry forward those losses into future tax years. When
our data collection is complete, an amended return will
be filed to correctly adjust our return(s).
Respondent did not receive either the so-called draft return
or the April 4, 1996 letter.
On or about April 3, 1996, petitioners filed an application
for an extension of time to file their 1995 return. The
application was consistent with petitioners’ actions taken in
prior taxable years. Respondent received petitioners’
application for extension.
At trial, petitioners introduced a “Receipt for Certified
Mail” (the postal receipt), indicating postage paid of 32 cents
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011