Eric E. and Dorothy M. Smith - Page 2




                                        - 2 -                                         
                                       OPINION                                        
               FOLEY, Judge:  Respondent determined a deficiency of $18,222           
          and a section 6662(a) penalty of $3,644 relating to petitioners’            
          1995 Federal income tax.  The parties submitted this case fully             
          stipulated pursuant to Rule 122.  Unless otherwise indicated, all           
          section references are to the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) in             
          effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the            
          Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.  After concessions,              
          the issue is whether the notice of deficiency is valid.                     
                                     Background                                       
               In April 1996, petitioners filed their 1995 return.  On                
          March 5, 1999, respondent sent to petitioners by certified mail,            
          a notice of deficiency relating to 1995.  Petitioners received              
          the notice in the middle of that month.  On April 29, 1999,                 
          petitioners’ counsel informed the Internal Revenue Service (IRS),           
          by telephone, that the letter did not include a date in the                 
          section of the letter entitled “Last Day to File a Petition With            
          the United States Tax Court” (the petition date).  Respondent               
          also failed to stamp a date in the section of the letter entitled           
          “Letter Date”.  On May 4, 1999, petitioners’ counsel received a             
          letter dated April 30, 1999, in which the IRS 90 Day Coordinator            
          wrote that “it appears the clerk failed to stamp the notice                 
          mailed to your client.”  Accompanying this letter was a copy of             








Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011