- 2 -
should be stricken as frivolous, immaterial, nonjusticiable,
and/or incomprehensible, and as violating the requirements of
Rule 34(b)(5).2 A hearing was conducted in Los Angeles,
California. At the hearing, petitioner orally moved to have the
case dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, asserting that the
notice of deficiency is invalid. At the conclusion of the
hearing, the Court took both motions under advisement.
Background
Respondent determined a deficiency in petitioner’s Federal
income tax for the taxable year 1998 in the amount of $2,983.
The cover page of the notice of deficiency shows a deficiency
amount of $2,938 for the 1998 taxable year. However, all of the
information contained in the explanatory statements accompanying
the notice shows the computation of the deficiency amount of
$2,983. Respondent simply made a $45 typographical error on the
face of the notice, resulting from the transposition of the last
two digits in the deficiency amount.
The notice of deficiency included the following documents:
(1) A cover letter titled “Notice of Deficiency”; (2) a Form 870,
Waiver of Restrictions on Assessment and Collection of Deficiency
in Tax and Acceptance of Overassessment (Waiver Statement); (3) a
Form 4089-A, Notice of Deficiency Statement; (4) a Form 5278,
2 Petitioner’s attachment to his petition is made a part of
the petition.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011