- 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 or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011