Marion Warren - Page 7

                                        - 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