- 9 -
information to the Court. He did not. For all of the foregoing
reasons, we conclude that petitioner is not entitled to a
deduction in the amount of $1,320 for a theft loss.3
Section 6651(a)(1) Addition to Tax
As of the time of trial, petitioner had not filed his 2000
Federal income tax return. Petitioner testified that he gave his
2000 return to a U.S. Postal Service employee at the 30th Street
Post Office Station in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, on the evening
of April 15, 2001. Respondent’s records, however, indicate that
petitioner requested an extension to file until August 15, 2001,
and to date, petitioner has not filed his return.
On the instant record, we find that petitioner has failed to
satisfy his burden of proving that his failure to file timely his
return for 2000 was due to reasonable cause and not willful
neglect. Sec. 6651(a). Accordingly, we sustain respondent's
determination imposing the addition to tax under section
6651(a)(1) for taxable year 2000.
3 Even if we did allow the petitioner a theft loss
deduction of $1,320, petitioner’s standard deduction for 2000
would be greater than the loss allowed. Accordingly, it is of no
tax consequence to petitioner that we sustain respondent on this
issue.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011