- 33 -
Manual sec. 20.1.2.1.2.3 (RIA 2002). Petitioners have provided
indirect evidence the Form 2688 was mailed and received by
respondent. First, both petitioners and respondent agreed
petitioners would testify Form 2688 was timely mailed. Second,
the Form 2688 submitted as Exhibit 8-P is stamped “Received
08/22/96". Notwithstanding that Exhibit 8-P is a photocopy and
the date stamp is not completely legible, the date stamp on the
Form 2688 is almost identical to the stamps on petitioners’ 1993
and 1994 Forms 1040, U.S. Individual Income Tax Return. Contrary
to respondent’s argument, the circular “quick-type” signature
neither proves nor disproves that respondent has received a
document; the 1993 and 1994 Forms 1040 were date stamped without
any signature or mark. Finally, respondent did make a mark in
the top check box on the lower left which is a check mark by the
IRS indicating that the Form 2688 was approved. The IRS has been
known, on occasion, to make illegible postmark date notations on
tax returns, misplace the mailing envelope bearing the postmark,
and even lose returns. Columbia Gas Sys., Inc. v. United States,
70 F.3d 1244, 1247 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (return lost); Borsody v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-534 (illegible date and envelope
lost), affd. 78 AFTR 2d 6045, 96-2 USTC par. 50415 (4th Cir.
1996); Collins v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-168 (envelope
lost). Respondent’s records may not show receipt of the Form
2688 because the IRS Service Center lost or misplaced
Page: Previous 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011