- 6 -
these reasons, we give little weight to Mrs. Schwechter’s
testimony.
Petitioner also introduced as circumstantial evidence of
timely filing, and as documentation of subsequent informal claims
for refund, copies of a series of letters purportedly sent by him
to the Internal Revenue Service during the years 1989 through
1995. Three of the letters purportedly sent to respondent on
December 17, 1989, April 4, 1990, and April 24, 1992, concern
only petitioner’s 1988 return. Another four letters purportedly
sent to respondent on August 2, 1990, January 23, 1991,
January 22, 1992, and March 16, 1992, address both petitioner’s
1988 and 1989 returns. Two additional letters introduced by
petitioner appear to be duplicate copies of one of the previously
mentioned letters, and a third was dated after the mailing of the
notice of deficiency. While the letters vary in length and
specificity, they all make it clear that petitioner is seeking a
refund for taxes paid in 1988 and/or 1989. Petitioner has
offered the letters for two distinct purposes. First, petitioner
offers the letters as circumstantial proof that he timely filed
his 1988 and 1989 returns. Second, petitioner contends that the
letters themselves constitute informal claims for refund.
We do not believe these letters are probative evidence
because the record demonstrates that the dates on some of
petitioner’s correspondence with the Internal Revenue Service
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011