- 6 -
The petition arrived at the Court in an envelope postmarked
November 26, 1997, and was filed by the Court on December 1,
1997. Given that the petition was neither mailed nor filed
before the expiration of the 90-day statutory period for filing
a timely petition, it follows that we lack jurisdiction over the
petition. Secs. 6213(a) and 7502; Rule 13(a), (c); see Normac,
Inc. v. Commissioner, supra.
The question presented is whether dismissal of this case
should be premised on petitioners' failure to file a
timely petition under section 6213(a) or on respondent's failure
to issue a valid notice of deficiency under section 6212.
Petitioners contend that they did not receive the notice of
deficiency and that the notice is invalid because it was not
mailed to their last known address.
Although the phrase "last known address" is not defined in
the Internal Revenue Code or in the regulations thereunder, we
have held that a taxpayer's last known address is the address
shown on the taxpayer's most recently filed return, absent clear
and concise notice of a change of address. Abeles v.
Commissioner, 91 T.C. 1019, 1035 (1988); see King v.
Commissioner, supra at 681. Although a taxpayer is obliged to
provide respondent with clear and concise notice of a change of
address, respondent must exercise reasonable care and due
diligence in ascertaining the taxpayer's correct address. King
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011