- 7 -
Respondent mailed the notice of deficiency in question to
petitioners at the Georgia address on September 9, 1994. The
petition arrived at the Court in an envelope postmarked January
4, 1996, and was filed by the Court on January 11, 1996. Given
that the petition was neither mailed nor filed before the
expiration of the 90-day statutory period for filing a timely
petition, it follows that we lack jurisdiction over the
petition. Secs. 6213(a), 7502; Rule 13(a), (c); see Normac,
Inc. v. Commissioner, supra.
The question presented is whether dismissal of this case
should be premised on petitioners' failure to file a timely
petition under section 6213(a) or on respondent's failure to
issue a valid notice of deficiency under section 6212.
Petitioners contend that they did not receive the notice of
deficiency and that the notice is invalid because it was not
mailed to their last known address.
Although the phrase "last known address" is not defined in
the Internal Revenue Code or in the regulations thereunder, we
have held that a taxpayer's last known address is the address
shown on the taxpayer's most recently filed return, absent clear
and concise notice of a change of address. Abeles v.
Commissioner, 91 T.C. 1019, 1035 (1988); see King v.
Commissioner, supra at 681. The burden of proving that a notice
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011