Estate of Melvine B. Atkinson, Deceased, Christopher J. MacQuarrie, Personal Representative - Page 15




                                       - 15 -                                         
          officer does not abuse her discretion when she fails to take into           
          account information that she requested and that was not provided            
          in a reasonable time.”  Murphy v. Commissioner, 125 T.C. 301, 315           
          (2005), affd. 469 F.3d 27 (1st Cir. 2006).                                  
               Ms. Clark initially requested at Mr. MacQuarrie’s April 13,            
          2004, summons appearance that the estate file the estate’s                  
          delinquent tax returns within 30 days.  After the 30 days had               
          lapsed and the estate failed to comply, Ms. Clark issued the                
          above-mentioned Notice of Intent to Levy and Your Right to a                
          Hearing on May 27, 2004.  Almost 6 months later, on November 19,            
          2004, and only days before the estate’s previously scheduled                
          collection hearing, the estate requested a delay in the hearing             
          date to afford the estate additional time to prepare the returns.           
          Mr. Feist obliged and rescheduled the collection hearing for                
          December 17, 2004.  On the morning of the rescheduled hearing,              
          the estate once again asked for additional time to prepare the              
          returns.  Mr. Feist declined the estate’s request.                          
               In total, from the time Ms. Clark initially requested the              
          estate’s delinquent tax returns, the estate had approximately 8             
          months to prepare and file the returns and failed to do so.  In             
          Roman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-20, this Court stated:               
               No statutory or regulatory provision requires that                     
               taxpayers be afforded an unlimited opportunity to                      
               supplement the administrative record.  Nor are                         
               petitioner’s contentions regarding lack of warning well                
               taken where the record in this case is replete with                    







Page:  Previous  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007