Estate of Kestutis Biskis - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         
               On October 6, 1999, respondent mailed by certified mail a              
          notice of deficiency addressed to Mr. Biskis and petitioner at              
          5705 Janes Avenue, Downers Grove, Illinois.  The notice                     
          determined a deficiency in their joint income tax for 1995.  On             
          October 23, 1999, petitioner received the notice wrapped in a               
          plastic bag.  The envelope in which the statutory notice was                
          contained was ripped, and a letter of apology from a manager of a           
          branch of the U.S. Postal Service (USPS) was affixed to the                 
          envelope or plastic bag.  Respondent did not send the original or           
          a copy of the notice of deficiency for taxable year 1995 to Mr.             
          Vebeliunas.  Upon receipt of the notice of deficiency, petitioner           
          immediately forwarded the notice to Mr. Vebeliunas.                         
               Respondent sent a copy of the notice of deficiency to                  
          petitioners on December 2, 1999.2  Respondent did not send an               
          original or a copy of the notice of deficiency to Mr. Vebeliunas.           
          On January 6, 2000, petitioners filed a timely petition with this           
          Court.                                                                      
               Petitioners filed the instant motion, asserting that the               
          notice of deficiency was invalid, because the original notice was           
          not sent to the individual listed on Form 2848.  Further,                   
          petitioners argue that even if the notice was valid, it was                 
          untimely since it was not properly mailed, and it was received by           
          petitioners after the period of limitations expired.                        


               2    The letter was erroneously dated Dec. 2, 2000.                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011