- 6 -
It is clear in the present case that respondent mailed the
notice of deficiency to petitioners on January 16, 1996.
Therefore, the 90-day period within which petitioners were
required to file their petition with the Court expired on Monday,
April 15, 1996. However, petitioners did not file a petition for
redetermination with this Court until Wednesday, May 1, 1996, the
106th day after the notice of deficiency was mailed. Moreover,
the petition did not arrive at the Court in an envelope bearing a
U.S. Postal Service postmark date. Further, it is clear that the
petition was deposited with the mail service of the United
Kingdom. Under these circumstances, it is evident that the
"timely mailing/timely filing" provisions of section 7502 are
inapplicable. It is also evident that the petition was not
timely filed within the 90-day time period prescribed by section
6213(a).
We note that the only matter raised by petitioners in their
Objection relates to the mailing date and place of mailing of
their petition; i.e., "The petition was filed on April 15, 1996
and was mailed from New York, New York." We must reject this
contention, however, because it is contrary to the record.
Regs., makes the provisions of sec. 7502 inapplicable in the case
of foreign postmarks. Cf. sec. 301.7502-1(c)(1)(iii)(b), Proced.
and Admin. Regs., which applies to domestic postmarks not made by
the U.S. Postal Service.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011