- 4 -
was mailed to each petitioner, and the article tracking number of
each letter.
On June 2, 2004, we filed petitioners’ objection to
respondent’s motion. Petitioners’ objection contained affidavits
stating under penalty of perjury that they did not receive the
notice of determination until February 20, 2004, and that it was
not sent by certified mail. Petitioners contend that the
petition was timely filed and that respondent should have
produced a signed return receipt from the U.S. Postal Service to
prove the date on which petitioners received the notice of
determination. Petitioners further argue that “the IRS has
already broken the law by denying Petitioners the CDP hearing
mandated by law and there should be no time restraint imposed
upon a victim who is denied due process mandated by statute.”
Respondent filed a reply to petitioners’ objection,
asserting that because a notice of determination in a collection
due process proceeding must be appealed within 30 days of its
issuance in order for the Tax Court to have jurisdiction, the
date on which petitioners claim to have received the notice of
determination is irrelevant to whether the petition was timely
filed. Respondent further argues that the notice of
determination was complete and valid on its face and was
sufficient to start the 30-day period within which petitioners
could appeal the determination.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011