86-0117 - Income

BEFORE THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH

_____________________________________

XXXXX

Petitioner, )

:

v. ) INFORMAL DECISION

:

)

COLLECTION DIVISION OF THE : Appeal No. 86 0117

STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH, ) Acct. No. XXXXX

:

Respondent. )

_____________________________________

STATEMENT OF CASE

An Informal Hearing was held on XXXXX. James E. Harward, Hearing Officer, heard the matter for and in behalf of the Utah State Tax Commission. XXXXX and XXXXX represented the Petitioners. The Collection Division was not represented.

The Petitioners testified that an "Application for Automatic Extension of Time to File Utah Income Tax Return" was filed on April 15, XXXXX. The extension was mailed by XXXXX, an employee of XXXXX, Petitioner's Accountant. An office check list indicates that the extension was mailed with several other returns or extensions sent by XXXXX's office to the Utah State Tax Commission. The Petitioner testified that when the return was filed, a copy of the application for extension of time was attached to the first page of the return. The Utah State Tax Commission date-stamped as received, a copy of the application for extension of time which was attached to the first page of Petitioner's return when it was filed. Therefore, the Tax Commission mistakenly believed that the extension of time was not timely filed. XXXXX's office now attaches a copy of the application for extension of time to the last page of the return. The copy of the application for extension of time, which was date-stamped by the Commission, is not signed. Petitioner testified that it was not the original application, but an office file copy which was attached to the front page of the return.

Respondent's written evidence shows an unsigned "Application for Automatic Extension of Time to File Utah Income Tax Return" date-stamped as received September 6, XXXXX. The Tax Commission denied Petitioner's request for a waiver of the penalty it assessed.

DECISION AND ORDER

Based on the foregoing facts, the written documentation and the evidence presented at the Hearing, it is the opinion of the Utah State Tax Commission that the application for extension of time was timely filed on April 15, XXXXX. Petitioner's accountant's office records, and employees confirm that the application for extension of time was timely filed, and his office practices indicate that a copy of the application for extension of time was attached to the first page of the return when it was filed within the extension time period. It is the further opinion of the Commission that when the Petitioner's return was received by the Utah State Tax Commission, the latter date-stamped the front page of the return, which was a copy of the application for extension of time. Later, when the Tax Commission saw the copy of the application date-stamped September 6, XXXXX, it believed that the Petitioner did not timely file the application for extension of time. THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY DECIDED:

That the penalty and the interest associated with the penalty be refunded.

DATED this 11 day of July, 1986.

BY ORDER OF THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH.

ABSENT

Mark K. Buchi R. H. Hansen

Chairman Commissioner

Roger O. Tew Joe B. Pacheco

Commissioner Commissioner