- 19 -
certified public accountant (C.P.A.) she hired to prepare her
request for innocent spouse relief advised her not to file and to
seek an extension until the IRS issued its determination. At
trial, however, petitioner testified that she went to the
C.P.A.’s office on April 15, 2004, to sign her return, she told
him to file her return notwithstanding his advice, and he claimed
that he could not prepare her return because he did not have all
of the paperwork. Petitioner made a series of partial payments
and subsequently requested an abatement of the penalties and
interest, which the IRS granted, and the resulting overpayment
was refunded.
Petitioner received an extension to file her 2004 return
until August 15, 2005. Petitioner filed her return on April 18,
2005; however, she did not submit a remittance of the tax until
June 3, 2005. Petitioner testified that she did not have the
money to pay the tax timely, but she paid it as soon as she
could.
Petitioner and her second husband timely filed and received
a refund for 2005.
The Court finds that petitioner has not complied with
Federal tax laws despite the two timely filed returns in 2002 and
2005. Petitioner would not have filed in 2001 but for the
allegedly forged return filed by Mr. Nakasu. Petitioner did not
establish that she had reasonable cause for failing to timely pay
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008