97-0147
SALES
Signed 11/24/97
BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
____________________________________
COMPANY C, )
:
Petitioner, ) DECISION
:
v. )
:
COLLECTION DIVISION
OF THE ) Appeal
No. 97-0147
UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION, :
STATE OF UTAH, ) Account
No. #####
:
Respondent. ) Tax
Type: Sales Tax
_____________________________________
IMPORTANT NOTICE: On October 7, 1997 the Utah Supreme Court, in Evans
and Sutherland Computer Corp v. Utah State Tax Commission,
invalidated the informal adjudicative process by disallowing trial de novo to the
District Court. Therefore, your appeal
is now being processed as a formal adjudicative proceeding. Under this process, you are entitled to an
additional right. Utah Law allows for
an Initial Hearing before the matter is heard on the record in a formal
proceeding. Therefore, the hearing held
in this matter will constitute the Initial Hearing. Please note in the body of the decision your right to, and the
method of request for, a formal hearing.
STATEMENT OF CASE
This matter came
before the Utah State Tax Commission pursuant to the provisions of Utah Code
Ann. '59-1-502.5. An Initial Hearing was held on July 3,
1997. Gail S. Reich, Administrative Law
Judge, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing Petitioner was
PETITIONERS REP., CPA. Present and
representing Respondent was Jan Sanchez of the Collection Division.
Based upon the
evidence in the file and presented at the hearing, the Commission makes its:
FINDINGS
This appeal
involves sales tax for August of 1996.
The return was due September 30, and was filed on time. Payment was due on September 30 also but was
not paid on that date. A failure to pay
penalty of 10% of the unpaid tax was imposed in the amount of $$$$$. The vendor discount of $$$$$ was
denied. Interest in the amount of
approximately $$$$$ has accrued.
Payment occurred one day late.
This is an instance
where the taxpayer caught the error prior to any billing notice from the Tax
Commission. Since this was an error caught
and corrected by the taxpayer on an account with few prior errors, the
situation falls within the criteria established by the Commission to justify
waiver of the penalty. Since the
taxpayer and not the Tax Commission had the benefit of the funds during the
interim period, and this is not the result of Tax Commission error, there are
no grounds to justify waiver of the interest.
APPLICABLE 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(10).)
DECISION AND ORDER
After a thorough
review of the entire matter, the Tax Commission has determined that sufficient
cause does exist to waive the penalty but not the interest associated with the
period in issue. It is so ordered.
This Decision does
not limit a party's right to a Formal Hearing.
Any party to this case may file a written request within thirty (30)
days of the date of this decision to proceed to a Formal Hearing. Such a request shall be mailed to the
address listed below and must include the Petitioner's name, address, and
appeal number:
Utah State Tax Commission
Appeals Division
210 North 1950 West
Salt Lake City, Utah 84134
Failure to request a
Formal Hearing will preclude any further administrative action or appeal rights
in this matter.
DATED this 24 day
of NOVEMBER, 1997.
BY ORDER OF THE
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
W. Val Oveson Richard B. McKeown
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B. Pacheco Pam Hendrickson
Commissioner Commissioner
^^