- 17 -
forth the adjustments (and explanations of those adjustments)
giving rise to such determinations. Petitioners have failed to
rebut the resulting presumption that respondent did determine
deficiencies in petitioners’ income taxes for their 1992 through
1995 taxable years.
Petitioners’ hearsay objection is misplaced. The notice
does not constitute hearsay, since it was not admitted into
evidence for the truth of the matters asserted therein, see Fed.
R. Evid. 801(c), but merely to evidence that it was issued and,
thus, formed a predicate for our jurisdiction, see Rule 13(a).
b. Assessment of Tax
Petitioners argue that, since respondent has not made an
assessment of tax under section 6203, there is no deficiency and,
therefore, the notice is invalid and this Court lacks
jurisdiction.
Petitioners fail to understand that, generally, the
determination of a deficiency in tax precedes assessment of the
tax. In pertinent part, section 6212(a) provides that, if the
Secretary determines that there is a deficiency in income tax,
“he is authorized to send notice of such deficiency to the
taxpayer by certified mail or registered mail”. In pertinent
part, section 6213(a) then allows the taxpayer 90 days (150 days
if the notice is addressed to a person outside of the United
States) to file a petition in the Tax Court for review of the
deficiency. Generally, section 6213(a) prohibits any assessment
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011