Walter R. Huff and Lucy C. Huff - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
               We disagree with petitioners that respondent’s failure to              
          produce the envelope in which respondent received their 1997 tax            
          return means as a matter of law that we must decide this case for           
          them.  In order to reach their desired end, petitioners rely                
          erroneously on Lewis v. United States, 144 F.3d 1220 (9th Cir.              
          1998), and Anderson v. United States, 966 F.2d 487 (9th Cir.                
          1992).5  In each of those cases, the taxpayer produced credible             
          evidence of the date of mailing of the document in question.                
          Here, by contrast, we do not find that Mr. Huff testified                   
          credibly that he mailed petitioners’ 1997 Form 1040 timely.                 
               Because respondent has failed to produce the envelope                  
          containing petitioners’ return, we decide this case as if the               
          postmark were missing; thus, petitioners may rely upon extrinsic            
          evidence to prove that the postmark, if present, would have been            
          timely.  See Jacobson v. Commissioner, 73 T.C. 610, 615, 616                
          (1979).  The only evidence petitioners introduced as to this                



          5 We understand petitioners to argue that we should decide                  
          this case by following the jurisprudence of the Court of Appeals            
          for the Ninth Circuit.  While we generally follow a decision                
          squarely in point of a circuit in which a case is appealable, see           
          Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742 (1970), affd. 445 F.2d 985              
          (10th Cir. 1971), absent the parties’ stipulation to the                    
          contrary, an appeal of this case lies in the Fifth Circuit; i.e.,           
          the circuit in which petitioners resided when they filed their              
          petition with this Court, sec. 7482(b)(1)(A) and (2).  In any               
          event, our decision would be the same whether appeal lay to the             
          Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit or to the Court of Appeals           
          for the Ninth Circuit.                                                      





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011