87-1081 - Corporate Franchise

 

BEFORE THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH

_____________________________________

XXXXX

            Petitioner,                                                         :

v.                                                                                 :           INFORMAL DECISION

                                                                                    :           FROM A REHEARING

COLLECTION DIVISION OF THE                          :           Appeal No. 87-1081

            UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION,            :           Acct. No. XXXXX

            Respondent.                                                     :

_____________________________________

STATEMENT OF CASE

            This matter was scheduled for formal hearing on XXXXX. James E. Harward, Hearing Officer, heard the matter for the Tax Commission.  XXXXX appeared representing the Petitioner.

            At the outset of the hearing it was disclosed that a question existed as to whether or not there was a proper appeal before the Tax Commission.  The question centered around the type of tax which had originally been appealed and the type of tax which was at issue at the hearing.  The matter was continued.  The Petitioner was referred to XXXXX of the Tax Commission who conducted an investigation and found that a penalty was erroneously assessed. The facts are as follows:

            Petitioners filed an extension for filing of the XXXXX corporate return.  With the extension request a $$$$$ payment was made.  The actual tax due was $$$$$.  The extended return date was XXXXX.  The return was not filed until XXXXX.  No money was due on the return and, in fact, a substantial credit existed.  A penalty was assessed on the late filing of $$$$$.

            After conducting its investigation, the XXXXX recommends reduction of the penalty to $$$$$ which should be the appropriate late filing penalty under the circumstances.

DECISION AND ORDER

            Based upon the foregoing, the hearing officer converted the matter from a formal hearing to a reopening of the informal hearing and thus this decision is a decision from the reopening of the informal decision.  The Tax Commission is in agreement that the appropriate penalty should have been the $$$$$ late filing penalty and, therefore, reduces the penalty to $$$$$.

            DATED this 9 day of March, 1988.

BY ORDER OF THE STATE TAX COMMISSION OF UTAH.

ABSENT