- 4 - granting respondent’s motion (although petitioner would have us deny respondent’s motion for other reasons). We agree with respondent that petitioner’s last known address is immaterial if we adopt her “actual notice” argument. We believe that respondent’s motion presents no genuine issue as to any material fact and that we can decide both petitioner’s and respondent’s motions as matters of law. For the reasons stated, respondent’s motion will be granted and petitioner’s motion will be denied. Facts On Which We Rely The parties have attached to their motions various affidavits, on which we rely to the extent that they are undisputed. We also rely on certain uncontested or inconsequential averments in the pleadings. The facts that we rely on to decide the motions are as follows. Petitioner; Its Returns Petitioner, an Indiana corporation, is a calendar-year taxpayer. Petitioner’s Federal income tax returns for 1985 through 1990 (the years in issue) were received at the Internal Revenue Service Center, Philadelphia Pennsylvania, on October 15, 1991. Petitioner and respondent entered into no agreement to extend the time to assess tax for any of the years in issue. Respondent’s Examination Respondent, by one of her revenue agents, Anne M. Price (Price), began an examination of petitioner’s 1991 tax year on orPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011