- 7 -
It has previously been determined that the 150-day period
applies not only to persons who are outside the United States "on
some settled business and residential basis", but also to persons
who are temporarily absent from the country. Mindell v.
Commissioner, 200 F.2d 38, 39 (2d Cir. 1952). In Mindell, the
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit clarified the reasoning
behind the 150-day rule by stating:
Whatever the reason for the taxpayer's absence from the
country receipt of the deficiency notice was likely to
be delayed if he was not physically present at the
address to which the notice was sent; hence he was
given additional time to apply for a review of the
deficiency. * * * [Id. at 39.]
In Mindell the Court of Appeals relied upon two related
factors for its decision: (1) Absence from the country (2)
resulting in delayed receipt of the notice of deficiency. We
subsequently expressed agreement with the holding in Mindell,
citing the above-quoted language. Levy v. Commissioner, 76 T.C.
228, 231 (1981); Lewy v. Commissioner, 68 T.C. 779, 783 (1977);
Estate of Krueger v. Commissioner, 33 T.C. 667, 668 (1960) (Court
reviewed). If there is no delayed receipt, the 150-day rule does
not apply. See Cross v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 613, 616 (1992);
Malekzad v. Commissioner, 76 T.C. 963, 970 (1981); Levy v.
Commissioner, supra; Lewy v. Commissioner, supra; Degill Corp. v.
Commissioner, 62 T.C. 292, 297 (1974); Cowan v. Commissioner, 54
T.C. 647, 652 (1970) (Court reviewed); Wade v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 1998-235.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011