- 8 -
2004, well after the expiration of the 90-day period for filing
plus the 2-day standard for it to be considered timely mailed.
Even if we account for the estimated 4 days it takes to irradiate
an item of mail addressed to a Government office in Washington,
D.C., petitioners’ petition was still not received in a timely
fashion under this rule.2 Because petitioners’ petition was
received and filed outside the prescribed period, including the
standard delivery time, it will be deemed timely filed only if
the following requirements are established by petitioner:
(i) That it was actually deposited in the U.S.
mail before the last collection of mail from the place
of deposit that was postmarked (except for the metered
mail) by the U.S. Postal Service on or before the last
date, or the last day of the period, prescribed for
filing the document or making the payment;
(ii) That the delay in receiving the document or
payment was due to a delay in the transmission of the
U.S. mail; and
(iii) The cause of the delay.
Sec. 301.7502-1(c)(1)(iii)(B)(2), Proced. & Admin. Regs.
The validity of this regulation has been upheld. Lindemood
v. Commissioner, 566 F.2d 646, 649 (9th Cir. 1977), affg. T.C.
2For the petition at issue to be timely filed under sec.
6213(a) it needed to be filed with the Court by Monday, Apr. 5,
2004. Accounting for the 2-day standard, had the piece of mail
at issue been mailed on Apr. 5, 2004, it would not have reached
this Court until Wednesday, Apr. 7, 2004. Accounting for the 4-
day period to irradiate the piece of mail at issue, it would not
have reached this Tax Court until Sunday, Apr. 11, 2004. Since
there is no mail delivered to the Court on weekends, the piece of
mail at issue would not have been received or filed by the Court
until Monday, Apr. 12, 2004.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011