Kent E. Hovind - Page 10

                                        -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