BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
In Re: ) AMENDED
: INFORMAL DECISION
XXXXX, ) Appeal No. 91-0683
: Account No. XXXXX
STATEMENT OF CASE
This matter was previously decided by the Commission, and subsequent to the decision, information was provided which had previously not been provided to the Commission.
This appeal arises out of the third quarter XXXXX sales tax return of the Petitioner. The return was due on XXXXX, and was filed on XXXXX, approximately XXXXX days late. The return showed an amount of $$$$$ due, and a patent of $$$$$ accompanied the return. The Petitioner misinterpreted the information requested on line 4, and had included all of her purchases on the line 4 which asks for items consumed, so that the total sales shown on which sales tax should have been collected was much larger than it should have been. However, Petitioner did not calculate or pay sales tax on the total sales shown on the return, but calculated it on the correct amount. Therefore, when the auditing division received the return, they made the calculation based upon the total sales as shown on the return of Petitioner. When she received the notice from the auditing division of the additional tax due, she called the Tax Commission and determined the mistake which had been made. She then filed an amended return on XXXXX, in which she showed the correct amount of taxable sales and the correct amount of tax. The correct amount of tax was as she had shown on the original return of $$$$$, which amount had been paid with the return.
A late filing penalty of $$$$$ was imposed, and because of the allocation of the payment to penalty and interest, it left the account showing a shortage by the amount of the penalty and interest which had been imposed. When that amount was not paid within 90 days, a late payment penalty was imposed in the amount of $$$$$, together with a $$$$$ legal fee. Petitioner had paid an amount equal to the full amount of the tax due within less than 90 days after the due date of the return, and the late payment penalty was imposed only because of the aforesaid allocation of the payments to penalty and interest.
Petitioner has made several calls to the Tax Commission to try to have this matter straightened out.
In addition, Petitioner has paid the $$$$$ late filing penalty, so that the amount outstanding represents the $$$$$ late payment penalty and the interest.
AMENDED DECISION AND ORDER
Based upon the foregoing, the Tax Commission finds sufficient cause does exist to waive the late payment penalty and the $$$$$ legal fee which have been imposed, and that sufficient cause does not exist to waive the $$$$$ late filing penalty which has been paid, nor to waive the interest. However, the interest should be adjusted to account for the waiver of the penalties and legal fees as imposed herein. It is so ordered.
DATED this 7 day of October, 1991.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Joe B. Pacheco S. Blaine Willes