Dorff v. Commissioner
This text of 1988 T.C. Memo. 117 (Dorff v. Commissioner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
MEMORANDUM OPINION
SWIFT,
By notice of deficiency dated March 23, 1987, respondent*141 determined a deficiency in petitioners' 1979 Federal income tax in the amount of $ 18,346. 2 The notice of deficiency was sent to petitioners' last known address by certified mail. Petitioners filed their petition on July 16, 1987, which is 115 days after March 23, 1987. On December 16, 1987, respondent filed his motion to dismiss.
A petition in this Court for redetermination of a deficiency must be filed within 90 days (or 150 days if the notice of deficiency is addressed to a person outside the United States) of the proper mailing of the notice of deficiency in order for a taxpayer to be entitled to litigate in this Court. Sec. 6213(a). The 90-day filing requirement must be satisfied as a prerequisite to this Court's jurisdiction.
A notice of deficiency is considered to have been properly mailed when the notice of deficiency is mailed by respondent to the taxpayer's last known address by certified or registered mail. Sec. 6212(a). If a notice of deficiency is properly mailed, a presumption arises that the notice was delivered or offered for delivery to the taxpayer in the normal course of the mail.
Petitioners contend that the notice of deficiency for 1979 was mailed to petitioners not on March 23, 1987, but on April 14, 1987, with a notice of deficiency for 1983 that was mailed on that date by respondent to petitioners. Petitioners' contention is not supported by the record.
Respondent submitted a copy of United States Postal Service Form 3877 with his motion to dismiss to establish the mailing of the notice of deficiency for 1979. Listed on the*143 Form 3877 are petitioners' names, the address of petitioners' residence, an identification of the notice of deficiency at issue, and verification of the March 23, 1987, postmark, thereby demonstrating that respondent mailed the notice of deficiency to petitioners on March 23, 1987. In
We conclude that respondent mailed to petitioners the notice of deficiency for 1979 on March 23, 1987. The petition in this case, therefore, was not timely filed. Respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction will be granted.
Footnotes
1. Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as in effect during the year in issue. ↩
2. The record does not contain a Form 872A extending the statute of limitations on assessment for 1979. Petitioners, however, have not raised the timeliness of the notice of deficiency as an issue in this case. See
Rule 39, Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.↩
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
1988 T.C. Memo. 117, 55 T.C.M. 412, 1988 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 140, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dorff-v-commissioner-tax-1988.