Gary R. Davis - Page 4

                                         -4-                                          
          examination notice was an initial contact letter and did not                
          offer petitioner an opportunity to meet with respondent’s Office            
          of Appeals (Appeals).  One day before mailing the examination               
          notice to petitioner, respondent had checked his computer records           
          for petitioner’s address.  Those records listed petitioner’s                
          address as 629 Mariola.  Respondent did not mail an examination             
          notice to petitioner at 629 Mariola.                                        
               Petitioner timely filed (pursuant to extensions) a joint               
          2001 Federal income tax return (2001 return).  Petitioner’s 2001            
          return was prepared by Campbell and reported that petitioner’s              
          address was 4302 Callahan.  Respondent received petitioner’s 2001           
          return on October 21, 2002, and processed it on November 18,                
          2002.                                                                       
               On April 4, 2003, respondent checked his computer records              
          for petitioner’s address.  Those records listed petitioner’s                
          address as 4302 Callahan.  On the same day, respondent mailed a             
          Letter 915(DO) (30-day letter) for 2000 to petitioner at 4302               
          Callahan.  The 30-day letter informed petitioner that he could              
          request a conference with the Appeals Office and was accompanied            
          by two copies of the examination notice.  On September 19, 2003,            
          respondent mailed to petitioner at 4302 Callahan a Letter                   
          1912(DO) that was accompanied by another copy of the examination            
          notice.  The Letter 1912(DO) stated that respondent’s Small                 
          Business and Self-Employed Division had reviewed petitioner’s               






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

Last modified: May 25, 2011