- 6 -
extended to 6 years under section 6501(e)(2), and the notice of
deficiency that was sent was therefore timely.
On the other hand, petitioner contended that the explanation
that was attached to the request for extension of time, a copy of
which was attached to the return when filed, was a clear
notification of the omitted assets that was disclosed in the
return, or in a statement attached thereto, and should have put
the Commissioner on notice of the omission, thereby eliminating
the 6-year period of limitations and reverting the period of
limitations to the basic 3 years under section 6501(a).
In this matter, we held that the notification by petitioner
to respondent contained in the original application for extension
of time, and repeated in the Federal estate tax return when
filed, constituted an adequate written notice within the meaning
of section 6501(e)(2). This decided the statute of limitations
matter in favor of petitioner. Nevertheless, we emphasized then,
and we repeat now, that no estate tax cases have been found
interpreting section 6501(e)(2), and we can find no regulation or
case authority that would offer either support or opposition for
petitioner's position or for respondent's position.
Accordingly, we conclude that petitioner has failed to show
that respondent was not substantially justified in taking the
position that attaching a copy of the request for extension of
time to the return as filed was an inadequate compliance with the
requirements of section 6501(e)(2). We held contrary to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011