- 3 - tax, was timely executed by petitioners on November 27, 1995, and by respondent on December 6, 1995. A second Form 872, extending to December 31, 1997, the time to assess tax, was timely executed by petitioners on October 15, 1996, and by respondent on October 24, 1996. Respondent asserts that a third Form 872, extending to June 30, 1998, the time to assess tax was timely executed by petitioners on March 14, 1997, and by respondent on March 19, 1997. Petitioners deny having executed this Form 872. Indeed, they assert that "each of them, to the best of their knowledge and belief, [has] never been presented in any way, manner, shape, or form, with a request to extend the time of statute [sic] till 6/30/98." Respondent sent a notice of deficiency to petitioners on June 5, 1998. Petitioners filed a timely petition from this notice of deficiency on August 25, 1998. It appears that the major item of dispute on the merits is whether $511,522 of gain on disposition of rental property is properly reportable for 1991, as respondent determined in the notice of deficiency, or for 1992, as petitioners contend. Discussion Petitioners' motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction focuses on two matters, as follows: (1) The notice of deficiency erroneously determined that the income in question was reportablePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011