- 13 -
After invoking this Court's jurisdiction, the taxpayers
filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. We held the
notice of deficiency to be valid and denied the taxpayers' motion
to dismiss. Scar v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 855 (1983).
In analyzing the issue on appeal, the Court of Appeals for
the Ninth Circuit concluded that the Commissioner must consider
information relating to a particular taxpayer before it can be
said that the Commissioner determined a deficiency with respect
to that taxpayer. Scar v. Commissioner, 814 F.2d at 1368. With
this standard in mind, the court found the notice of deficiency
to be invalid under section 6212(a) because the notice on its
face revealed that the Commissioner had not reviewed the
taxpayers' return or otherwise made a determination respecting
the taxpayers' liability for the particular taxable year. Scar
v. Commissioner, supra at 1370.
Significantly, the courts applying Scar, including both this
Court and the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, have
limited the rule established in that case to its facts. See
Sealy Power, Ltd. v. Commissioner, 46 F.3d 382, 387-388 (5th Cir.
1995); Kantor v. Commissioner, 998 F.2d 1514, 1521-1522 (9th Cir.
1993); Clapp v. Commissioner, 875 F.2d 1396, 1402 (9th Cir.
1989); Campbell v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 110, 114-115 (1988);
Pope & Associates, P.C. v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-213;
Burnside v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-308; Stinnett v.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011