-10-
would be required to pay the taxes assessed by respondent and to
pursue a refund claim and a refund suit in Federal District
Court. Secs. 6511, 7422.
Also, if a taxpayer receives a notice of tax lien filing
under section 6320 and does not request a hearing with regard
thereto, the taxpayer may not in a subsequent hearing under
section 6330 relating to a proposed levy contest the underlying
tax liabilities. Sec. 301.6330-1(e)(3), Q&A-E7, Proced. & Admin.
Regs.
If respondent properly mails a notice of deficiency to a
taxpayer, a presumption arises that the notice was delivered to
the taxpayer in the normal course of the mail. Zenco Engg. Corp.
v. Commissioner, 75 T.C. 318, 323 (1980), affd. without published
opinion 673 F.2d 1332 (7th Cir. 1981).
The act of mailing may be proven by evidence of respondent's
mailing practices corroborated by direct testimony or documentary
evidence of mailing. Fed. R. Evid. 406; Magazine v.
Commissioner, 89 T.C. 321, 326 (1987); Cataldo v. Commissioner,
60 T.C. 522, 524 (1973), affd. per curiam 499 F.2d 550 (2d Cir.
1974); August v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 1535, 1536-1537 (1970).
Respondent bears the burden of proving proper mailing of a
notice of deficiency. Coleman v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 82, 90
(1990); Cataldo v. Commissioner, supra; August v. Commissioner,
supra.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011