- 3 -
Court was that the statute of limitations barred the assessment
of tax. Due to a strong belief in the foregoing argument,
petitioner and her attorney decided it was not necessary to
provide the Court with any substantiation of the disallowed
expenses.
Petitioner and her husband filed their returns under the
filing status "married filing separate". They "never" mailed
their returns at the same time.
Petitioner's argument regarding the statute of limitations
is based on her position that she mailed her return on April 15,
1996. The date petitioner allegedly signed her 1995 tax return
is April 5, 1996. (The date typed on the return was “Aprilk596"
[sic]). The envelope in which the return was mailed is
postmarked April 18, 1997, by the U.S. Postal Service. The date
stamped on the front of the 1995 return as the date the return
was received by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) is April 8,
1997, 10 days prior to the date of the postmark.
On an IRS Form 895 pertaining to petitioner, there is a
notation that the postmark date on the envelope, in which the
return was mailed, is April 18, 1997, and that the received date
(April 8, 1997) is wrong. This document lists the expiration
date of the period of limitations as April 18, 2000. The notice
of deficiency was mailed on December 28, 1999.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011