Moshe Rothbard - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          apply those provisions of the Code and the regulations.                     
               On the record before us, we find that petitioner has failed to         
          establish (1) that the envelope in question was actually deposited          
          in the U.S. mail on or before December 26, 2000, the last day for           
          timely filing a petition in the Court,2 see secs. 6213(a), 7503;            
          (2) that the delay in the Court’s receiving the petition was due to         
          a delay in the transmission of the U.S. mail; and (3) the cause of          
          the delay.  See sec. 301.7502-1(c)(1)(iii)(b), Proced. & Admin.             
          Regs.  On that record, we find that petitioner has failed to show           
          that the petition was timely filed.  See secs. 6213(a), 7502(b);            
          sec. 301.7502-1(c)(1)(iii)(b), Proced. & Admin. Regs.  Accordingly,         
          we shall grant respondent’s motion.                                         
               To reflect the foregoing,                                              

                                             An appropriate order granting            
                                        respondent’s motion to dismiss for            
                                        lack of jurisdiction will be entered.         










               2Petitioner does not dispute that he was required to file a            
          petition in the Court on or before Dec. 26, 2000, with respect to           
          the notice that respondent issued to him for his taxable year               
          1997.                                                                       





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  

Last modified: May 25, 2011