- 6 - opportunity to petition this Court for a redetermination of that deficiency. Id. In Scar v. Commissioner, 814 F.2d 1363, 1368 (9th Cir. 1987), revg. 81 T.C. 855 (1983), the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that respondent must consider information relating to a particular taxpayer before respondent can be said to have determined a deficiency with respect to that taxpayer. For purposes of determining whether the notice of deficiency provides sufficient information to apprise the taxpayer that the Commissioner has determined a deficiency in tax, a notice of deficiency includes the cover page and all attached pages and documents. Smith v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1979-16. If a notice of deficiency otherwise fulfills its purpose, we have held that a mathematical error in the notice will not invalidate the notice where the taxpayer is not misled by the error. See Myers v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1981-84; see also Smith v. Commissioner, supra. Despite a trivial transposition error on the cover page of the notice of deficiency, petitioner was adequately informed of the income tax and issues in controversy by the notice of deficiency. The petition indicates that petitioner was not misled by the transposition error; rather, petitioner was fully aware of the typographical error’s existence. The notice of deficiency was not misleading and put petitioner on notice thatPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011