- 5 -
Mr. Selter appeared at the hearing and offered argument in respect
of the pending motion. Mr. Selter informed the Court that he had
contacted Ms. Hunt and that she had agreed to appear at the hearing.
However, Mr. Selter failed to issue a subpoena to Ms. Hunt, and she
did not appear to testify. However, the office manager of Mr.
Selter’s firm did appear and testify. Also, during the hearing, Mr.
Selter offered as an exhibit an article titled "Postal Service Gives
'Check in the Mail' A Whole New Twist", published in the New York
Times on July 28, 2000. Respondent objected to the admission of the
article on the ground that it was hearsay. The Court deferred
ruling on the admissibility of the article.
Discussion
The Court's jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency depends
upon the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and a timely filed
petition. Rule 13(a), (c); see Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22,
27 (1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988).
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). The
taxpayer, in turn, generally has 90 days from the date the notice of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011