- 3 -
timely filed petition. Rule 13(a); Monge v. Commissioner, 93
T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Abeles v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 1019, 1025
(1988); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988).
Ordinarily, a petition for redetermination of a deficiency must
be filed with this Court within 90 days from the mailing of the
notice of deficiency. Sec. 6213(a). The failure to file within
the prescribed period requires that the petition be dismissed for
lack of jurisdiction. Estate of Rosenberg v. Commissioner, 73
T.C. 1014, 1016-1017 (1980).
Section 7502 and the regulations thereunder provide that, in
certain circumstances, a timely mailed petition will be treated
as though it were timely filed. Section 301.7502-1(c)(2),
Proced. & Admin. Regs., provides:
If the document * * * is sent by U.S. certified mail
and the sender’s receipt is postmarked by the postal
employee to whom the document * * * is presented, the
date of the U.S. postmark on the receipt is treated as
the postmark date of the document. Accordingly, the
risk that the document will not be postmarked on the
day that it is deposited in the mail may be eliminated
by the use of * * * certified mail.
In the instant case, petitioners sent their petition by certified
mail. However, the regulation does not apply because the
sender’s receipt4 was never presented to any postal employee and
4A sender’s receipt to which sec. 301.7502-1(c)(2), Proced.
& Admin. Regs., refers is part of a certified mail form. Denman
v. Commissioner, 35 T.C. 1140, 1142 (1961); Brown v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1982-165. The receipt is filled in by
the sender, and, upon request, it will be postmarked by the
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011