- 6 -
Petitioner notes that the Commissioner’s obligation to provide
the petition date in the notice of deficiency is described in
mandatory terms. Petitioner argues that respondent’s failure to
provide the petition date as required renders the notice invalid.
We recently addressed section 3463(a) of RRA 1998 in Smith
v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 489 (2000). The taxpayer in Smith
received a notice of deficiency mailed after December 31, 1998,
which failed to specify the last day for filing a timely Tax
Court petition. The taxpayer therein nonetheless filed his
petition within the 90-day period prescribed by section 6213(a).
We rejected the taxpayer’s argument that the notice of deficiency
was rendered invalid by the Commissioner’s failure to comply with
section 3463(a) of RRA 1998. Instead, we held that where the
Commissioner fails to provide the petition date on the notice of
deficiency but the taxpayer nonetheless receives the notice and
files a timely petition, the notice is valid. See id. at 492.
Unlike the taxpayer in Smith, petitioner did not file his
petition within the 90-day period prescribed by section 6213(a).
Petitioner therefore argues that our decision in Smith does not
foreclose his argument that the notice of deficiency in this case
is invalid. Despite the fact that petitioner filed his petition
beyond the statutory period, we hold that the notice in this case
is valid. We explain our reasoning below.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011