- 20 -
Consequently, according to petitioner, his failure to file timely
a return for his taxable year 1999 was due to reasonable cause
and not to willful neglect. Even if petitioner timely sent to
respondent an unsigned return for his taxable year 1999, which
respondent disputes, any such action by petitioner would not
establish that his failure to file timely a return for his
taxable year 1999 was due to reasonable cause and not to willful
neglect. See Elliott v. Commissioner, supra at 128-131. On the
instant record, we find that petitioner has failed to show that
he is not liable for the increase in the 1999 addition to tax
under section 6651(a)(1) that respondent assessed on May 5, 2003,
and that is attributable to the 1999 return.
We address next whether petitioner has carried his burden of
establishing that he is not liable for the increase in the 1999
addition to tax under section 6651(a)(2) that respondent assessed
on May 5, 2003, and that is attributable to the 1999 return. As
discussed above, petitioner conceded in the petition that he did
not pay timely the tax shown in the 1999 return. Nonetheless, as
we understand petitioner’s position, he contends that he relied
on the advice of a certified public accountant that he did not
have to pay the tax shown due in the 1999 return when that return
was sent to respondent around March 18, 2003. Consequently,
according to petitioner, his failure to pay timely the tax shown
in the 1999 return was due to reasonable cause and not to willful
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011