- 7 - However, petitioner has failed to recognize that the cases in which the common law mailbox rule is applied are generally those where the return was never received by the IRS, not those where the return was received after its due date bearing a legible but untimely postmark. See Anderson v. United States, supra; Estate of Wood v. Commissioner, supra. "When a legible postmark appears on an envelope no evidence that the petition was mailed on some other day will be allowed." Shipley v. Commissioner, 572 F.2d 212, 214 (9th Cir. 1977), affg. T.C. Memo. 1976-383. Petitioner offered no explanation why the envelope was postmarked and received almost exactly 1 year after it was allegedly mailed. We find that the return was mailed after the due date on April 18, 1997, the date the envelope was postmarked. When a return is mailed after the due date, the return is considered filed on the date the return is actually received by the IRS. Emmons v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 342, 346-347 (1989), affd. 898 F.2d 50 (5th Cir. 1990); Radding v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1988-250. Petitioner’s return was received by the IRS at some point between April 18, 1997, and April 26, 1997. Because there was some question as to the exact date the return was received, the IRS used the earliest date of April 18, 1997, as the received date. We shall do the same. Therefore, we find that petitioner’s return was received on April 18, 1997, and was filedPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011