DocketNumber: Docket No. 521-68.
Filed Date: 2/10/1970
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/20/2020
Memorandum Opinion
SCOTT, Judge: Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioners' income tax for the calendar year 1964 in the amount of $1,688.87.
One of the issues raised by the pleadings has been disposed of by concession of petitioners, leaving for our decision whether petitioners who first filed a joint Federal income tax return for the calendar year 1964 102 may file separate returns for that year after the expiration of the period provided for the filing of returns, in order to claim two $1,000 capital loss deductions.
All of the facts have been stipulated and are found accordingly.
Petitioners, husband and wife who on the date the petition in this case was filed and during the entire calendar year*325 1964 were residents of Houston, Texas, filed a joint United States individual income tax return for the calenrar year 1964, which was received by the district director of internal revenue on May 3, 1965. The date appearing after the signatures of petitioners on this return is April 30, 1965. April 30, 1965 was a Friday.
Under date of April 14, 1965, petitioners applied on form 2688 to the collector of internal revenue for an extension of time to file their income tax return for the calendar year 1964 to June 15, 1965. On April 20, 1965, petitioners' application was denied by the district director with the following statement:
Careful consideration has been given to the reasons and other data given in your application but it has been determined that the extension is not warranted. Your return should be filed by the regular due date or within 10 days of the date of signature of this notice, if the end of such 10-day period is later than the regular due date. The 10-day period granted shall constitute a valid extension of time for filing returns for purposes of elections required to be made on timely filed returns. Please attach this form to the return to explain the delay in filing.
*326 The return filed by petitioners under date of April 30, 1965, showed $16,000 as total income, a standard deduction of $1,000, and dependency exemptions of $3,600, with taxable income of $11,400, on the basis of which their income tax was computed. Attached to this return was the following statement:
This is not a final return. Time did not allow us to prepare a complete, detailed return. An amended return will follow.
On February 8, 1966, Thomas J. Leger filed a form 1040 denominated, "Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return - 1964" in which he reported income of $10,878.90, arrived at by subtracting from reported income of $11,878.90 an amount of $1,000 of loss on the sale or exchange of property. On February 8, 1966, Margaret H. Leger filed a form 1040 entitled, "Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return - 1964" which likewise reported $10,878.90 of income which was arrived at by subtracting from $11,878.90 of income an amount of $1,000 designated as a loss on the sale or exchange of property *327 as a certified public accountant and stated that enclosed were separate U.S. individual income tax returns for petitioners with accompanying checks, and further stated:
I timely filed an individual return, however I was not able to complete all the details. Beginning in the latter part of 1964 I spent over 80 of my time out of the country and was unable to complete and file this amended return prior to now.
The letter further stated that the underpayment of tax on the original timely filed return was not due to negligence nor intentional disregard of rules and regulations, since at the time the original return was filed the taxpayer was of the opinion that he had paid sufficient income tax.
In
Petitioners apparently do not argue that this holding is incorrect but contend that even though they originally filed a joint Federal income tax return they should be permitted later, where it is to their advantage, to elect to file separate returns. Petitioners apparently do not contend that the joint return originally filed by them was such a tentative return that it should not be treated as a return for all purposes under the Internal Revenue Cod. In fact, Thomas J. Leger, in the letter transmitting the separate returns specifically 103 referred to the timely joint return which had been filed. The return contained sufficient information to constitute a return. It may also be noted that respondent made no determination of any addition to tax either for a late filing of petitioner's teturn or for any other reason.
As we*329 understand petitioners' position, it is solely that under *330 The exact issue presented in the instant case was before this Court in This section, for which*331 there is no corresponding provision in the House bill, adds new subsection (g) to This statement is followed by a detailed discussion of the various provisions of This amendment adds to In accordance with our holding in Decision will be entered for respondent.
1. On each of the returns filed by petitioners on February 8, 1966, deductions were itemized, each petitioner claiming itemized deductions of $1,236.81. However, no issue is involved with respect to the claiming of itemized deductions by petitioners. The total losses reported on Schedule D of the return filed by Thomas J. Leger showed short-term capital losses from commodity trades of $11,589.66 and long-term capital losses of $550.98.↩
2.
(b) Joint Return After Filing Separate Return. -
(1) In general. - Except as provided in paragraph (2), if an individual has filed a separate return for a taxable year for which a joint return could have been made by him and his spouse under subsection (a) and the time prescribed by law for filing the return for such taxable year has expired, such individual and his spouse may nevertheless make a joint return for such taxable year. A joint return filed by the husband and wife under this subsection shall constitute the return of the husband and wife for such taxable year, and all payments, credits, refunds, or other repayments made or allowed with respect to the separate return of either spouse for such taxable year shall be taken into account in determining the extent to which the tax based upon the joint return has been paid. If a joint return is made under this subsection, any election (other than the election to file a separate return) made by either spouse in his separate return for such taxable year with respect to the treatment of any income, deduction, or credit of such spouse shall not be changed in the making of the joint return where such election would have been irrevocable if the joint return had not been made. If a joint return is made under this subsection after the death of either spouse, such return with respect to the decedent can be made only by his executor or administrator. ↩
3.
(a) In general. (1) A husband and wife may elect to make a joint return under