- 4 -
($3,750); the balance of the deficiency ($964) was attributable
to a change in petitioner’s filing status (from head-of-household
to married filing separately) and the disallowance of two
dependency exemption deductions.
Respondent sent the notice of deficiency to petitioner by
certified mail addressed to him at the Stilwell address.
However, petitioner did not receive the notice, and, on or about
January 17, 2001, it was returned to respondent by the Postal
Service.2 Thereafter, on June 11, 2001, respondent assessed the
deficiency against petitioner.
On June 14, 2001, petitioner filed a Federal income tax
return (Form 1040) for the taxable year 2000. On his return,
petitioner listed his address as 13410 North Webster Road,
Tahlequah, Oklahoma 74464.3 On his return, petitioner reported
zero tax and claimed a refund in the amount of $401. The latter
amount consisted of withholding in the amount of $185 and an
earned income credit in the amount of $216. Respondent applied
$185 of the claimed refund against petitioner’s outstanding
2 It is not completely clear why the notice of deficiency
was returned to respondent by the Postal Service. A partial copy
of the envelope in which the notice was apparently mailed bears a
stamp “not deliverable as addressed”; however, a second (but
incomplete) stamp, together with handwriting, suggests that the
envelope was returned to respondent unclaimed after two attempts
at delivery.
3 Each of the three Forms W-2, Wage and Tax Statements,
that accompanied petitioner’s income tax return for 2000
identified the Stilwell address as petitioner’s address.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011