Neal A. Sanders, d.b.a. Law Offices of Neal A. Sanders - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         

          jurisdiction.3  Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22 (1989); Yusko v.          
          Commissioner, supra at 807.                                                 
               The phrase "last known address" is not defined in the Internal         
          Revenue Code or the regulations.  However, we have held that a              
          taxpayer's last known address is the address shown on his most              
          recently filed return, absent clear and concise notice of a change          
          of address.  Abeles v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 1019, 1035 (1988);             
          accord Aibejeris v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-31.  We have also         
          held that "last known address" is the address where the Commissioner        
          reasonably believed the taxpayer wished to be reached.  Weinroth v.         
          Commissioner, 74 T.C. 430, 435 (1980); Keeton v. Commissioner, 74           
          T.C. 377, 381-382 (1980); Snow v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-457.        
               The taxpayer bears the burden of proving that the notice of            
          deficiency was not sent to the taxpayer's last known address.  Yusko        
          v. Commissioner, supra at 808.  "Taxpayers are required to send a           
          clear and concise notification directing respondent to use a                
          different address to be assured of effecting a change in the 'last          
          known address.'  Alta Sierra Vista, Inc. v. Commissioner, 62 T.C.           
          367, 374-375 (1974), and cases collected therein."  Looper v.               
          Commissioner, 73 T.C. 690, 696 (1980).  To supplant the address on          
          the most recent return, the taxpayer must clearly indicate that the         


               3    However, a notice of deficiency sent to the wrong                 
          address is valid if it is received by the taxpayer without                  
          prejudicial delay.  Berger v. Commissioner, 404 F.2d 668 (3d Cir.           
          1968), affg. 48 T.C. 848 (1967); Goodman v. Commissioner, 71 T.C.           
          974 (1979).                                                                 



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

Last modified: May 25, 2011