- 6 -
amounts on the first page of the 30-day letter and the deficiency
notice differ. Petitioners do not argue or contend that the
$2,327.40 determined in the deficiency notice is not the correct
income tax deficiency that would result based upon the
disallowance of the claimed $8,448 contribution carryover
deduction.
Respondent counters that the $2,327.40 income tax deficiency
set forth in the deficiency notice constitutes a valid
determination under the statute. Respondent points out that the
deficiency notice is the jurisdictional document upon which this
proceeding is based. Additionally, respondent points out that no
agreement was reached with petitioners regarding the amount of
deficiency attributable to the adjustment disallowing the $8,448
that was erroneously claimed as a contribution carryover.
Respondent admits that the $1,153.23 amount stated on the first
page of the 30-day transmittal letter that forwarded the
examination report to petitioners was incorrect but nevertheless
contends that it is not binding.
We agree with respondent. The notices that may precede the
statutory notice of deficiency during the administrative portion
of the controversy are generally irrelevant to establishing the
deficiency amount. See Greenberg’s Express, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 62 T.C. 324 (1974). It is the determination in the
deficiency notice that constitutes respondent’s determination or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011