- 5 -
the 1994 taxable year) appearing on the copy of the notice of
deficiency attached to the petition.
Discussion
This Court's jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency
depends upon the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and a
timely filed petition. Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27
(1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988);
Rule 13(a), (c). Section 6212(a) expressly authorizes the
Commissioner, after determining a deficiency, to send a notice of
deficiency to the taxpayer by certified or registered mail. It
is sufficient for jurisdictional purposes if the Commissioner
mails the notice of deficiency to the taxpayer at the taxpayer's
"last known address". Sec. 6212(b); Frieling v. Commissioner, 81
T.C. 42, 52 (1983). If a deficiency notice is mailed to the
taxpayer's last known address, actual receipt of the notice is
immaterial. King v. Commissioner, 857 F.2d 676, 679 (9th Cir.
1988), affg. 88 T.C. 1042 (1987); Yusko v. Commissioner, 89 T.C.
806, 810 (1987); Frieling v. Commissioner, supra at 52. The
taxpayer, in turn, generally has 90 days from the date that the
notice of deficiency is mailed to file a petition in this Court
for a redetermination of the deficiency. Sec. 6213(a).
The record shows that respondent did not issue a notice of
deficiency to petitioner for 1994 prior to the filing of the
petition in this case. In fact, respondent mailed a notice of
deficiency to petitioner for 1994 on May 18, 1998, and petitioner
filed a petition with the Court, assigned docket No. 14211-98S,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011