Anthony and Lena C. Andre - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          statute,” id. at 943, but reasoned that                                     
               Just as clearly, however, Plaintiff’s course of action                 
               comported with the obvious intent of the statute--                     
               namely, to provide only a limited window of opportunity                
               to cure a mistaken filing with the wrong court.                        
               Presumably, Plaintiff had no argument to offer against                 
               the IRS’s contention that the Tax Court lacked                         
               jurisdiction over her appeal.  No statutory purpose                    
               would have been advanced if Plaintiff had awaited a                    
               formal Tax Court ruling on this point before commencing                
               this action.                                                           
          Id.                                                                         
               We believe, however, that the Andres’ case is not enough               
          like FirsTier or Render.  Even setting to one side the question,            
          addressed by neither party, of whether the Commissioner’s                   
          regulations--so clear on this point--can trump a mere rule of               
          construction, we note that both the Supreme Court in FirsTier and           
          the District Court in Render carefully described a key reason for           
          allowing the premature filings in those cases to be effective:              
          lack of prejudice to the other party.  See FirsTier, 498 U.S. at            
          273 (“certain premature notices do not prejudice the appellee”);            
          Render, 309 F. Supp. 2d at 944 (premature filing of complaint               
          “caused no conceivable prejudice to the opposing party”).                   
               Allowing premature CDP requests to be effective, in                    
          contrast, would cause prejudice to the Commissioner.  The IRS is            
          a bulk-processing organization that sends and receives hundreds             
          of millions of notices and returns each year.  If the system is             
          to work, almost all of those notices and returns have to quickly            
          fit into pigeonholes (or their modern-day equivalent, the                   





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011