Robert C. Olson - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         

          Maxwell v. Commissioner, supra at 788; Palmer v. Commissioner,              
          T.C. Memo. 1992-352, affd. without published opinion 4 F.3d 1000            
          (11th Cir. 1993).   Indeed, we have expressly held that we lack             
          jurisdiction to consider computational adjustments in a                     
          subsequent deficiency proceeding to redetermine additions to tax.           
               In his petition and his objection to respondent's Motion to            
          Dismiss, petitioner contends that the FPAA mailed to him pursuant           
          to section 6223(a)(2) and (d)(2) should be considered ineffective           
          notice of the partnership proceeding because his poor health                
          precluded him from comprehending such notice.  In this regard,              
          petitioner alleged that he was depressed, that he was developing            
          ulcerative colitis, and that he almost died.  However, petitioner           
          never presented any evidence regarding the state of his health at           
          the time that the FPAA was mailed to him in April 1988.                     
          Petitioner has therefore failed to establish the factual                    
          predicate necessary to any consideration of his legal argument.2            
               Further, in his petition, petitioner alleged that respondent           
          erred in assessing the tax attributable to petitioner's                     
          partnership items.  Petitioner subsequently clarified his                   
          position and recognized that this Court does not have                       

          2 In the context of the deficiency procedures prescribed in                 
          subch. B of ch. 63, the analog of an FPAA is a notice of                    
          deficiency.  We note that, as a general rule, a notice of                   
          deficiency is legally sufficient if it is mailed to a taxpayer at           
          the taxpayer's last known address, even if the taxpayer is under            
          a legal disability or incompetent.  Sec. 6212(b)(1); Mulvania v.            
          Commissioner, 81 T.C. 65, 67-68 (1983).                                     




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011