- 6 -
1984-171 (same); see also Lundy v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1997-
14, discussing the various possible dates that a deficiency
notice might be deemed to be mailed.
Using Monday, October 21, 2002, as the date of mailing of
the notice of determination, then the 30-day period for timely
filing a petition with this Court expired on Wednesday, November
20, 2002, which date was not a legal holiday in the District of
Columbia. However, the petition was not received and filed by
the Court until Friday, November 29, 2002, the 39th day after the
mailing of the notice of determination. Moreover, the envelope
in which the petition was received at the Court bears a postmark
date of Wednesday, November 27, 2002, the 37th day after the
mailing of the notice of determination. See sec. 7502(a). It
follows that the petition was late filed and that we must
therefore dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. See McCune
v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 114 (2000).
Notwithstanding the fact that petitioner cannot pursue his
case in this Court, petitioner may perhaps have a legal remedy.
In this regard, we observe that the October 21, 2002, notice of
determination did not sustain respondent’s proposed levy action
because, as of the date of the notice, petitioner’s tax
liabilities for the years in issue had been fully paid,
principally through the application of setoffs made pursuant to
section 6402(a). See Bullock v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011