Donna M. Bokman - Page 8

                                        - 7 -                                         
          to some incongruities.  Nonetheless, we find that the record in             
          this case shows that section 7502 is inapplicable and that                  
          petitioner’s return was not timely filed.                                   
               The first requirement for the applicability of section 7502            
          is that the postmark on the envelope bear a date on or before the           
          due date of the return.  Id.  This requirement is met because the           
          return bears the date of October 15, 1996, its due date.  The               
          second requirement is that the return be received in the ordinary           
          amount of time for a document bearing that postmark date.  Id.              
          This requirement has not been met.  Petitioner mailed her return            
          on October 15, 1996, and the IRS did not receive the return until           
          6 days later, on October 21, 1996.  We take judicial notice of              
          the U.S. Postal Service’s Publication 201, Consumer’s Guide to              
          Postal Services & Products, a portion of which petitioner                   
          attached to her trial memorandum.  This publication states that 3           
          days is the normal delivery time for nonlocal first class mail.             
          See also Kirschenbaum v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2001-102;                 
          Robinson v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-146; Fujioka v.                   
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-316; Chang v. Commissioner, T.C.              
          Memo. 1998-298.  The delivery time of 6 days in this case falls             
          outside this timeframe.                                                     
               A return that is not received in the ordinary amount of time           
          will nevertheless be considered as having been so received if               
          certain requirements are met.  These requirements have not been             

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011