95-1170

Income

Signed 4/16/96

BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

____________________________________

XXXXX,

Petitioner, : FINDINGS OF FACT,

) CONCLUSIONS OF LAW,

v. : AND FINAL DECISION

)

CUSTOMER SERVICE DIVISION OF : Appeal No. 95-1170

UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, )

Respondent. : Account No. XXXXX

) Tax Type: Income Tax

_____________________________________

STATEMENT OF CASE

This matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a formal hearing on XXXXX, Gail S. Reich, Administrative Law Judge, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the Petitioner were XXXXX and XXXXX. Present and representing the Respondent was XXXXX.

The issue in this case is whether the Tax Commission properly used refunds otherwise due to the Petitioner to offset tax due for XXXXX and XXXXX years. The Tax Commission=s records show that no tax was paid for XXXXX and XXXXX. Petitioner asserts that the tax was paid for those years.

Petitioner asserts that he paid $$$$$ to the Tax Commission for XXXXX taxes sometime in the fall of XXXXX. The Tax Commission has no record of that payment. Petitioner has no record of the payment. Petitioner neither obtained evidence from the bank of the payment nor did he search his storage records where he indicates the evidence would be found. Petitioner submitted a tax return prepared by XXXXX for the XXXXX taxes for which XXXXX initially identified as an amended return. The return is dated XXXXX, showing the tax still due and owing. Later at the hearing, XXXXX indicated that was the initial return, however, still claiming that the payment was made in the fall of XXXXX. Similarly, Petitioner indicated that payment was made for XXXXX taxes by XXXXX but shows no evidence of that payment. Neither party was able to indicate or produce any records for the payments made.

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 income tax.

2. The period in question is XXXXX and XXXXX.

3. Petitioner did not pay the amount of tax due and owing for either XXXXX or XXXXX state taxes.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

The Respondent properly applied Petitioner=s refund to offset the outstanding obligation which existed as a result of non-payment of XXXXX and XXXXX income tax.

DECISION AND ORDER

Based upon the foregoing, the Tax Commission finds that Petitioner has provided no evidence to support the assertion that he paid XXXXX and XXXXX taxes and, consequently, holds in favor of the Commission. The Commission upholds the Division=s application of the refund to offset the tax due and owing for XXXXX and XXXXX. It is so ordered.

DATED this 16 day of April, 1996.

BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.

W. Val Oveson Roger O. Tew

Chairman Commissioner

Joe B. Pacheco Alice Shearer

Commissioner Commissioner

NOTICE: You have twenty (20) days after the date of a final order to file a Request for Reconsideration with the Commission. If you do not file a Request for Reconsideration with the Commission, you have thirty (30) days after the date of a final order to file a.) a Petition for Judicial Review in the Supreme Court, or b.) a Petition for Judicial Review by trial de novo in district court. (Utah Administrative Rule R861-1A-5(P) and Utah Code Ann. ''59-1-601(1), 63-46b-13 et. seq.)

^^