James Carlyle Maloney, Jr. - Page 6

                                        - 6 -                                         
          229; Surowka v. United States, 909 F.2d 148 (6th Cir. 1990);                
          Miller v. United States, 784 F.2d 728, 730 (6th Cir. 1986); Brown           
          v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-567, affd. without published               
          opinion 181 F.3d 99 (6th Cir. 1999); Bruder v. Commissioner, T.C.           
          Memo. 1989-328.  We are not required to accept, nor shall we                
          accept, petitioner’s testimony that he timely mailed his return.            
          See Geiger v. Commissioner, 440 F.2d 688, 689 (9th Cir. 1971),              
          affg. per curiam T.C. Memo. 1969-159; Tokarski v. Commissioner,             
          87 T.C. 74, 77 (1986).  Nor do we attach any weight to the                  
          dubious copy of petitioner’s return for 2000 that he produced at            
          trial.                                                                      
               Moreover, petitioner makes no argument that he had                     
          reasonable cause and lacked willful neglect in not filing the               
          return.  In fact, he claims he did file the return.  We therefore           
          find that petitioner has failed to demonstrate reasonable cause             
          and lack of willful neglect.  Accordingly, we sustain                       
          respondent’s determination that petitioner is liable for the                
          addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1) for failure to file                
          timely.  Because respondent did not submit a computation to the             
          Court reflecting the proposed increase, we sustain respondent               
          only as to the addition to tax under section 6651(a)(1)                     
          determined in the notice of deficiency.                                     
               Respondent also determined petitioner was liable for an                
          addition to tax of $268 under section 6654(a) for failure to make           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011