Benjamin V. Gomez - Page 3

                                          3                                           
               On August 24, 1995, respondent sent petitioner a notice of             
          deficiency for the taxable year 1993 determining an income tax              
          deficiency of $10,734, plus additions to tax under section                  
          6651(a)(1) of $2,683.50, and under section 6654(a) of $449.67.              
          The 90-day period for timely filing a petition with respect to              
          the 1993 notice of deficiency expired on Wednesday, November 22,            
          1995.  On December 7, 1995, petitioner filed with the Court an              
          amended petition purporting to place in issue the taxable year              
          1993.  The Court did not retain the envelope in which this                  
          amended petition was filed.                                                 
               In his objection to respondent's motion to dismiss, and                
          again at the hearing in this matter, counsel for petitioner                 
          alleged that the "incorrectly styled" amended petition was timely           
          filed on November 21, 1995, based upon a certificate of service             
          dated November 21, 1995, on which was also imprinted a private              
          postage meter stamp for zero postage dated November 21, 1995.  In           
          a Supplemental Opposition to respondent's motion to dismiss for             
          lack of jurisdiction, petitioner contended, in part, that the               
          normal rules relating to the timeliness of petitions do not apply           
          because the Government was shut down on November 21, 1995, during           
          the 90-day period within which petitioner was to file his                   
          petition, and, therefore, that day was a holiday in Washington,             
          D.C.  In his Supplemental Opposition, counsel for petitioner                


          consider this question.                                                     




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011