- 16 -
those documents received on February 23, 2000, which date is more
than 3 months before the date of the May 31, 2000, notice of
proposed adjustments and the May 31, 2000, revenue agent’s
report. There is no evidence that the notice or the revenue
agent’s report were ever put together with the SFRs and filed as
section 6020(b) returns.
We find that the notice of proposed adjustments and the
revenue agent’s report cannot be considered to be part of the
SFRs that respondent prepared. We cannot agree with respondent’s
suggestion that the presence of what are essentially “dummy
returns” and a revenue agent’s report somewhere in the record
meets the requirements of section 6020(b). If that were the
case, respondent could dispense with any degree of formality in
preparing section 6020(b) returns, and sections 6020(b) and
6651(g) would apply in every case that comes before us where a
return was not filed and a tax was not paid. Certainly, our
decisions in Phillips and Millsap mandate a greater degree of
formality than that suggested by respondent.17
The record in the instant case contains essentially the same
materials that were involved in Phillips v. Commissioner, supra.
17Respondent does not argue that his final determination
contained in the notice of deficiency issued on Sept. 28, 2001,
should be considered in determining whether sec. 6020(b) returns
were filed. Indeed, such an argument would be inconsistent with
our opinions in Phillips v. Commissioner, 86 T.C. 433 (1986) and
88 T.C. 529 (1987), affd. in part and revd. in part on another
issue 851 F.2d 1492 (D.C. Cir. 1988).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011