BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION
: FINDINGS OF FACT,
Petitioner : CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,
v. : AND FINAL DECISION
AUDITING DIVISION OF THE : Appeal No. 92-1537
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :
: Account No. XXXXX
STATEMENT OF CASE
This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a formal hearing on XXXXX. Paul F. Iwasaki, Presiding Officer, heard the
matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the Petitioner was XXXXX. Present and representing the Respondent was XXXXX, Assistant Utah Attorney General.
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 special fuel tax.
2. The period in question is XXXXX through XXXXX.
3. As a result of an audit conducted by the Auditing Division, it was
determined that for the period in question the Petitioner reported on its Special Fuel User Tax Return XXXXX miles traveled in Utah. The actual miles traveled in Utah during that period were XXXXX miles.
4. The Petitioner's representative testified that the discrepancy was due to a "computer error" which occurred when the Petitioner was switching its accounting and tax matters from one computer software system to another.
5. As a result of the reporting error, additional tax due in the amount of $$$$$ was due which the Petitioner paid. Additionally, a penalty in the amount of $$$$$ and interest in the amount of $$$$$ was imposed.
6. The Petitioner paid the tax and interest, however, is seeking waiver of the penalty portion of the assessment.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The Tax Commission is granted the authority to waive, reduce, or compromise penalties and interest upon a showing of reasonable cause. (Utah Code Ann. §59-1-401(8).)
DECISION AND ORDER
In the present case, the Petitioner argues that the penalty should be waived because the "computer error" was beyond their control and thus imposition of a penalty would be unreasonable.
The Tax Commission finds that under the circumstances and facts surrounding this case, the imposition of the penalty is appropriate. The Petitioner's representative was unable to testify as to what procedures, if any, were in place to assure that errors of this type would not occur. In the absence of such procedures, the Petitioner must bear the risk of errors that go undetected.
Based upon the foregoing, the Tax Commission finds that sufficient cause has not been shown which would justify a waiver of the penalty associated with the period of XXXXX through XXXXX. It is so ordered.
DATED this 12th day of November, 1992.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
R. H. Hansen Roger O. Tew
Joe B. Pacheco S. Blaine Willes