E. Neal Figler - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
          farcical swearing contests, with impermissibly high rewards for             
          false testimony, if we awarded unconditional relief to every                
          taxpayer who was willing to testify that he had not received the            
          notice of deficiency”).  Petitioner’s testimony in the instant              
          case was unreliable and improbable.  We also take note of                   
          respondent’s evidence that, in a divorce proceeding in a superior           
          court in New Haven, Connecticut, the court determined that                  
          petitioner’s “testimony was consistently not worthy of belief,”             
          that “he was not truthful about his income,” and that “he lied              
          about his income and personal expenses.”                                    
               The preponderance of the evidence shows that the statutory             
          notice of deficiency was duly mailed to petitioner at his last              
          known address and that petitioner failed to petition this Court             
          within 90 days of the mailing of the notice of deficiency as                
          required by section 6213(a).3                                               

               3 Even if we were to conclude that petitioner did not                  
          receive a notice of deficiency or otherwise did not have an                 
          opportunity to dispute the underlying tax liabilities as provided           
          by sec. 6330(c)(2)(B), we would hold, on the basis of the                   
          evidence in the record, that respondent properly mailed the                 
          notice of deficiency to petitioner for purposes of sec. 6212 and            
          that the period of limitations had not run on the assessment of             
          the liabilities in issue.                                                   
               Pursuant to sec. 6503(a), the period of limitations on                 
          assessment is suspended during the 90-day period following the              
          mailing of a notice of deficiency, until the decision of the Tax            
          Court becomes final, if the taxpayer petitions the Tax Court                
          during the 90-day period, and for 60 days thereafter.  Petitioner           
          filed his 1994 and 1995 Federal income tax returns on Oct. 16 and           
          Nov. 1, 1996, respectively.  On Aug. 11, 1999, respondent                   

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011