- 15 -
indicate that the Commissioner has determined a deficiency in tax
in a definite amount for a particular taxable year and that the
Commissioner intends to assess the tax in due course. Olsen v.
Helvering, 88 F.2d 650, 651 (2d Cir. 1937); Perlmutter v.
Commissioner, 44 T.C. 382, 400 (1965), affd. 373 F.2d 45 (10th
Cir. 1967). Absent exceptional circumstances, we will not look
behind a notice of deficiency to examine the evidence used by the
Commissioner in the determination of a deficiency. Scar v.
Commissioner, 814 F.2d at 1368; Greenberg's Express v.
Commissioner, 62 T.C. 324, 327-328 (1974).
In Scar v. Commissioner, supra, the taxpayers, after
receiving a deficiency notice that disallowed a deduction from a
partnership with which the taxpayers had no connection, contended
that the Commissioner had not "determined" a deficiency against
them as contemplated under section 6212(a). The notice of
deficiency included as an attachment an explanation of the
adjustments that stated in pertinent part: "In order to protect
the government's interest and since your original income tax
return is unavailable at this time, the income tax is being
assessed at the maximum tax rate of 70%." Id. at 1365.
After filing a petition with the Court, the taxpayers filed
a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. We held the
preceding sentence shall not invalidate such notice.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011