Robert Musselman and Adrianne Magd - Page 3

                                        - 3 -                                         
               Under sections 6213(a) and 7503, the 90-day period within              
          which petitioners could challenge respondent’s determination in             
          this Court expired on April 4, 2005.  The envelope in which the             
          petition was mailed to this Court bears no postmark date, but               
          petitioners did not even sign the petition until April 7, 2005,             
          which was 3 days after the deadline.  Further, petitioners failed           
          to respond to respondent’s motion and do not argue that they                
          mailed the petition on or before the deadline.  Because                     
          petitioners failed to file their petition within the statutory              
          90-day period, we must grant respondent’s motion to dismiss for             
          lack of jurisdiction.  Our decision, however, does not deprive              
          petitioners of their right to contest respondent’s determination            
          by paying the tax, filing a claim for refund, and then, if the              
          claim is denied, bringing a suit for refund in a U.S. District              
          Court or the Court of Federal Claims.  Our decision instead                 
          forecloses petitioners from contesting respondent’s determination           
          in this suit.  See Budlong v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 850, 854 n.2            
          (1972).                                                                     
               Accordingly,                                                           

                                             An order of dismissal will be            
                                        entered.                                      










Page:  Previous  1  2  3  

Last modified: May 25, 2011