- 9 -
guidelines for issuing deficiency notices, see 2 Audit, Internal
Revenue Manual (CCH), sec. 4462.1, at 7900, provide that
certified mail is not to be used to send deficiency notices
abroad. In Rogers v. Commissioner, supra, respondent tried to
use certified mail to send a notice of deficiency to the
taxpayers' address in Honduras shortly before the expiration of
the statutory period of limitations for assessing the deficiency.
After the statutory period had expired, the notice was returned
to respondent undelivered because the U.S. postal regulations did
not allow the delivery of certified mail abroad. Respondent
thereupon placed the notice into another envelope, which was sent
to the taxpayers by registered mail. Respondent argued in this
Court that the assessment period was suspended as of the date on
which respondent attempted to send the notice via certified mail.
We disagreed. We stated that, although section 6212 allowed
respondent to send deficiency notices by certified mail,
respondent could not use certified mail to send abroad the
deficiency notice in question because the U.S. postal regulations
did not allow it. In those circumstances, we held that the
mailing of the notice by certified mail did not comply with
section 6212 and thus was ineffective to toll the limitations
period. Id. at 713.
It does not appear that the 1982 FPAA was returned to
respondent undelivered. Petitioner acknowledges receiving the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011