97-0933
Property
____________________________________
PETITIONER, :
:
Petitioner, : ORDER
:
v. : Appeal No. 97-0933
:
COLLECTION
DIVISION OF THE : Account No. #####
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, :
:
Respondent. : Tax Type: Property
_____________________________________
STATEMENT OF CASE
This
matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission pursuant to the Administrative
Procedures Act and the rules of the Utah State Tax Commission for informal
adjudicative proceedings. An Informal
Hearing was held on July 22, 1997. Jane
Phan, Administrative Law Judge, heard the matter for and on behalf of the
Commission. Present and representing
Respondent were RESPONDENT REP..
Although duly notified of the date, time and location of the Informal
Hearing as well as instructions for appearing by telephone conference call,
Petitioner failed to appear. The
Commission notes that Petitioner did call the Appeals Section prior to the
hearing and left a telephone number.
However, the Administrative Law Judge called the telephone number at the
time of the hearing and was told Petitioner was not in and would not be in all
day.
Petitioner
is appealing the assessment of late filing, late payment and fraud penalties
for the years 1985, 1986 and 1992. For
1985 the fraud penalty had already been abated, but the fraud penalties had not
been abated for the later years.
Since
Petitioner failed to appear at the hearing the Tax Commission is making the
decision based on the information in the file and the information presented by
the Respondent at the hearing.
Petitioner maintained in the Petition for Redetermination letter that he
had filed the returns at issue and that he was unaware there was a problem
until 1994 when he was notified by the Commission. In the letter he insisted that no fraud was involved. It was Respondent's position that the fraud
penalty should be waived. Respondent's
representatives explained that the fraud penalty had originally been assessed
by the auditor who had performed the audit of Petitioner's individual income
tax liability and made a non-filing assessment. After the non-filing assessment Petitioner filed returns for each
of the years in question. Respondent's
representatives were unsure why the fraud penalty had been assessed in the
first place and asked that it be waived by the Tax Commission.
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
Based
upon the information presented at the hearing, and the records of the Tax
Commission, the Commission finds sufficient cause been shown to waive the fraud
penalties assessed against Petitioner relating to his income tax for the years
1986 and 1992. Sufficient cause was not shown to waive the late filing or late
payment penalties for the years 1985, 1986 and 1992. It is so ordered.
DATED
this 13 day of AUGUST, 1997.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
Jane Phan
Administrative Law
Judge
The
agency has reviewed this case and the undersigned concur in this decision.
DATED this 13 day of
AUGUST, 1997.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
W. Val
Oveson Richard
B. McKeown
Chairman Commissioner
Joe B.
Pacheco Pam
Hendrickson
Commissioner Commissioner
^^