- 6 -
T.C. 263, 269 (2001); Offiler v. Commissioner, supra at 498; see
also Rule 330(b).
Petitioner did not challenge the validity of the notice of
determination. We observe that the notice was mailed to the same
address that petitioner listed as his return address on the
envelope bearing the petition and on the envelope bearing the
notice of objection. Accordingly, it appears that the notice of
determination was mailed to petitioner at his last known address.
See sec. 6330(a)(2)(C). Under the circumstances, the sole issue
for decision is whether the petition was timely filed.
The record in this case demonstrates that the petition was
not filed within the 30-day period prescribed in section
6330(d)(1). The record shows that respondent mailed the notice
of determination to petitioner on March 30, 2001. Consequently,
and by virtue of section 7503, the 30-day filing period expired
on Monday, April 30, 2001–-a date that was not a legal holiday in
the District of Columbia. The petition in this case was received
and filed by the Court on May 7, 2001, 1 week after the
expiration of the 30-day period. It follows that we must dismiss
this case for lack of jurisdiction. See McCune v. Commissioner,
115 T.C. 114 (2000).
We agree with respondent that petitioner is unable to take
advantage of the so-called timely mailing/timely filing rule of
section 7502(a). Although section 7502(a) provides that, in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011