10
48 T.C. 656, 661 (1967). Johnson v. Commissioner, 611 F.2d 1015
(5th Cir. 1980), revg. and remanding T.C. Memo. 1977-382. Of
course, as noted above, a notice of deficiency will be valid
regardless of whether it was mailed to a taxpayer's "last known
address" if the taxpayer receives actual notice of the deficiency
and is not unduly prejudiced in timely filing his or her
petition. Mulvania v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 65, 68 (1983);
Frieling v. Commissioner, supra.
The Forms 2848 executed by the parties in the cases cited
above directed the taxpayers to choose between having originals
or copies of all notices and written communications sent to their
representatives. The Commissioner revised Form 2848 in March
1991. The new Form 2848, at issue in the instant case, provides
simply that "notices and other written communications will be
sent" to the taxpayer's designee. We are thus faced with the
question whether the language in the revised Form 2848 changes a
taxpayer's "last known address" to that of his or her
representative.
It is not unreasonable for a taxpayer who files a power of
attorney containing the language at issue to rely on the
assumption that the Commissioner will send notices to his or her
representative. The Commissioner was cognizant of the
outstanding caselaw addressing the prior language of the power of
attorney, as evidenced by Revenue Procedure 61-18, 1961-2 C.B.
550. Had the Commissioner intended that the act of sending
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011