Keith K. Stroupe - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         
               In Sicari, the taxpayers never moved, but the Postal Service           
          refined the taxpayers' address twice within a period of 1 year.             
          Although the Court of Appeals noted that the taxpayers had used             
          the refined address on requests for extension filed with the                
          Commissioner prior to the mailing of the notice of deficiency,              
          this was not the primary basis of the Court of Appeals' holding             
          that the Commissioner had not acted with the requisite reasonable           
          diligence.  Rather, the Court of Appeals based its holding on the           
          following circumstances, all of which occurred before the mailing           
          of the notice of deficiency: The taxpayer used the refined                  
          address on a petition filed in bankruptcy proceedings; the                  
          collection division of the IRS received prompt notice of the                
          bankruptcy filing and entered the refined address in one of the             
          Commissioner's computer databases; and the collection division              
          proceeded to use the refined address in correspondence with the             
          taxpayers and on proof of claim forms filed against the taxpayer            
          in bankruptcy.  It was only in light of such "extraordinary                 
          circumstances" and "on the precise facts of th[e] case" that the            
          Court of Appeals held that the deficiency notice had not been               
          mailed to the taxpayers' last known address.  Id. at 926.                   
          Because such circumstances are not present in the instant case,             
          we are not persuaded by petitioner's contention that by filing              
          Forms 4868 he gave respondent clear and concise notice of a                 
          change of address.                                                          






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011