- 9 -
burden of proving its applicability. Rules 39, 142(a).
Petitioner must make a prima facie case establishing the filing
of its return, the expiration of the statutory period, and
receipt or mailing of the notice after the running of the period.
Coleman v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 82, 89 (1990).
The notice of deficiency was mailed to petitioner on March
9, 1994. Petitioner contends that it mailed a return by first-
class mail on June 1, 1990, and an amended return on October 28,
1990. Respondent has no record of receiving either of these
returns. According to respondent's records, petitioner's return
was received on March 11, 1991, less than 3 years before the
mailing of the notice of deficiency. Consequently, we must
determine whether petitioner has established that it filed either
of the alleged prior returns.
Under the common law mailbox rule, the proper mailing of a
return gives rise to a rebuttable presumption of delivery.
Anderson v. Commissioner, 966 F.2d 487, 491 (9th Cir. 1992);
Smith v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-270, affd. without
published opinion 81 F.3d 170 (9th Cir. 1996). Petitioner
contends that, pursuant to this rule, it has established that the
prior returns were delivered. David and Harvey testified that
they properly mailed the returns by handing an appropriately
addressed envelope to a post office clerk. Petitioner contends
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011