- 3 -
issued notices of deficiency to petitioner at his last known
address in Suffolk, Virginia (the notice), and to Amilu at her
address in Colorado Springs, Colorado (Amilu’s notice). The U.S.
Postal Service later returned the notice sent to petitioner in
Suffolk, Virginia, marked “undeliverable as addressed, no
forwarding order on file”. Petitioner did not receive a copy of
the notice.5
On September 6, 1988, Jeffrey Berg, an attorney representing
limited partners in the Elektra Hemisphere tax shelter
litigation, filed a petition with this Court on behalf of
petitioner and Amilu seeking a redetermination of their 1980
deficiency.6 Mr. Berg attached to the petition a copy of Amilu’s
notice. In Martin v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-187 (Martin
I), affd. on other grounds 38 Fed. Appx. 980 (4th Cir. 2002), we
granted petitioner’s request to dismiss him from the 1980
deficiency case for lack of jurisdiction, concluding that
petitioner did not file, authorize the filing of, or ratify the
filing of the petition Mr. Berg signed and submitted. The
5Although petitioner did not receive the notice, Arthur
Robb, petitioner’s authorized representative pursuant to Form
2848, Power of Attorney and Declaration of Representative,
received a copy. Respondent does not contend in this case that
receipt of the notice by Mr. Robb qualified as receipt by
petitioner for purposes of sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
6On Aug. 4, 1986, at petitioner’s request, Mr. Berg had
filed a petition for redetermination of petitioner’s 1981 and
1982 income tax deficiencies.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011