BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
_____________________________________
XXXXX
Petitioner, : FINDINGS OF FACT,
: CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW,
v. : AND FINAL DECISION
COLLECTION
DIVISION OF THE : Appeal No. 90-0117
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :
: Account
No. XXXXX
Respondent. :
_____________________________________
STATEMENT OF CASE
This
matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a formal hearing on
XXXXX. Joseph G. Linford, Presiding
Officer, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the Petitioner were
XXXXX.
Based
upon the evidence and testimony presented at the hearing, the Tax Commission
hereby makes its:
FINDINGS
OF FACT
1.
The tax in question is sales and use tax.
2.
The period in question is the fourth quarter of XXXXX.
3.
Upon receiving their XXXXX bank statement, Petitioner called the Tax Commission
offices to find out why their check for the period in question had not been
cashed. They were told three separate
times that there was no problem and that the account did not show any
outstanding balances. Petitioner's bank
informed the Petitioner that the check had been returned by the bank for lack
of signature and not lack of funds. The
check sent to the Tax Commission does not have a signature on it, however, the
carbon copies of the check in Petitioner's possession do have a signature on
them. It is not known why the check
itself has no signature, but its carbon copies do. The signatures are carbon signatures and not original ones.
4.
By letter dated XXXXX, the Tax Commission waived the penalty amounts for the
period in question. Petitioner now
requests a waiver of the interest amount.
CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW
1.
Utah Code Ann. §§59-1-401 and59-1-402 provide that penalties and interest shall
be assessed for the late filing or payment of taxes.
2.
Utah Code Ann. §59-1-401(8) provides that upon reasonable cause shown, the
Commission may waive or reduce penalties and interest assessed under the above
statutes.
3.
Such reasonable cause has not been shown in this case. The penalty has already been waived. Interest should not be waived because the
State has not had the use of the funds in question for a period of time and
should be compensated for that loss of use.
Petitioner questions why interest continued to accrue even after
Petitioner paid the tax amounts in question after learning of the difficulty
with the original check. Interest
continues to accrue because any payments are applied first to penalty amounts,
then to interest, and lastly to tax amounts, so in this case there would have
been some tax amount remaining upon which interest has continued to accrue to
this date.
DECISION AND ORDER
Based
upon the foregoing, it is the decision and order of the Utah State Tax
Commission that Petitioner's request for waiver of interest is denied.
DATED
this 28 day of August, 1990.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
R. H. Hansen Roger
O. Tew
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B.
Pacheco G.
Blaine Davis
Commissioner Commissioner