James A. and Muriel M. Andrews - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                          

          testified that, when he received a copy of the notice of                     
          deficiency and the May 31 letter, he advised petitioners that                
          they had 90 days from May 31 to file a petition.                             
               When the Commissioner determines a deficiency in income tax,            
          he may send a notice of deficiency by certified or registered                
          mail to the taxpayer at his last known address.  Sec. 6212(a) and            
          (b)(1).  The “last known address” is the address where the                   
          Commissioner reasonably believed the taxpayer wished to be                   
          reached.  Follum v. Commissioner, 128 F.3d 118, 119 (2d Cir.                 
          1997), affg. per curiam T.C. Memo. 1996-474; Monge v.                        
          Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27-28 (1989).  If mailed to the last               
          known address, the notice is valid even if not received by the               
          taxpayer and even if the Commissioner later receives information             
          showing that the taxpayer resided at a different address.  See               
          Tadros v. Commissioner, 763 F.2d 89 (2d Cir. 1985); Abeles v.                
          Commissioner, 91 T.C. 1019 (1988).  The Commissioner is entitled             
          to treat the address shown on the taxpayer’s most recently filed             
          and properly processed return as the taxpayer’s last known                   
          address, absent clear and concise notification of an address                 
          change.  Follum v. Commissioner, supra at 119-120; Abeles v.                 
          Commissioner, supra at 1035.                                                 
               The Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, where an appeal            
          in this case would lie, has held that the Commissioner has:                  

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011