- 15 - rather than the tax liability ultimately assessed by the Commissioner, even when income for the preceding year was fraudulently understated on the return. Mendes v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. 308, 324 (2003). An invalid return, however, for the previous year will not suffice for purposes of the safe harbor under section 6654(e)(2). Mendes v. Commissioner, supra. If petitioner’s 1999 tax return is to be treated as a valid tax return on which zero liability was reported, despite respondent’s later deficiency assessment, petitioner might qualify for the section 6654(e)(2) safe harbor for 2000. Because, however, the record herein does not include evidence as to the validity of petitioner’s 1999 income tax return, this safe harbor is not available to petitioner. Section 6654(e)(3)(B)(i) and (ii) also provides an exception to this addition to tax where a taxpayer became disabled during either the year the estimated tax payments were not made or the preceding year, and where the tax underpayment is due to reasonable cause and not due to willful neglect. See Thomas v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-258. Petitioner was diagnosed with mental distress in 1999, the year preceding the year in issue. Petitioner, however, has not shown that his failure to pay estimated tax was due to reasonable cause.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011