- 5 -
privately metered mail showing a date within the 90-day period is
considered timely filed if it is received within the normal
delivery time for mail postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service.
See Lindemood v. Commissioner, supra; sec. 301.7502-
1(c)(1)(iii)(b), Proced. & Admin. Regs. The petition was
received by this Court 256 days after the date shown on the
private postmark. The normal delivery time for first-class mail
between San Francisco, California, and Washington, D.C. is
approximately 3 days. See Lindemood v. Commissioner, supra.
Since the petition was not delivered within the normal delivery
time for mail postmarked by the U.S. Postal Service, petitioners
are not entitled to relief under this part of the regulation
unless they establish: (1) The actual date of mailing and that
such date was prior to the expiration of the 90-day period; (2)
that the delay in delivery was attributable to delay in the
transmission of mail; and (3) the cause of such delay. See id.;
sec. 301.7502-1(c)(1)(iii)(b), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
Petitioners have failed to provide evidence or testimony
that establishes the cause for the delay in delivery.
Accordingly, section 7502 does not afford petitioners any relief.
We note also that the applicable regulations, section
301.7502-1(c)(1)(iii)(b), Proced. & Admin. Regs., state:
If the envelope has a postmark made by the United
States Post Office in addition to the postmark not so
made, the postmark which was not made by the United
States Post Office shall be disregarded, and whether
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011