- 12 -
In Ward v. Commissioner, supra, the taxpayer sent to the
Commissioner a letter containing the taxpayer’s new address. Id.
at 518. During the period for processing the address change, the
Commissioner prepared a notice of deficiency with the taxpayer’s
old address as it appeared in the Commissioner’s computer. Id.
at 519. The taxpayer did not receive the notice of deficiency
and knew nothing of the deficiency until after the 90-day period
for petitioning this Court had expired. Id. The Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit concluded that the Commissioner did
not exercise reasonable diligence in ascertaining the taxpayer’s
last known address. Id. at 522. The Commissioner’s agent should
have noticed that the taxpayer’s computer file displayed the
letters “PN” (pending notice) and a posting code, signifying a
pending address change. Id. The Court of Appeals held that the
notice of deficiency was invalid, noting that, under section
6212(a): ”To be effective, a notice of deficiency must be mailed
to the taxpayer at his ‘last known address’.” Id. at 521.
In Mulder v. Commissioner, supra, the taxpayer relocated and
did not notify the Commissioner of the change in his address.
Id. at 209. In an effort to secure an extension of the
applicable period of limitations on assessment from the taxpayer,
the Commissioner mailed to the taxpayer’s old address, but
received back as undeliverable, two extension requests. The
Commissioner also mailed the notice of deficiency by certified
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011