Warren L. Owens - Page 10

                                        - 9 -                                         
          Plainview, Detroit, MI 48228-1070792, on December 1, 1998.  On or           
          about November 23, 1998, the IRS had received from petitioner a             
          copy of a Form 1040 for 1992, and both the return and the                   
          envelope in which it arrived reflected the Plainview address.               
          Petitioner also stated at the hearing on respondent’s motion that           
          he moved from the Plainview address in 1999 or 2000.  Thus, the             
          evidence shows that the notice of deficiency was sent in a manner           
          in compliance with, and valid under, section 6212 and                       
          corresponding regulations, requiring that a notice of deficiency            
          be sent to a taxpayer’s last known address.  See sec. 6212(a) and           
          (b)(1).                                                                     
               However, section 6330(c)(2)(B) focuses upon receipt of the             
          notice of deficiency.  During the administrative proceedings,               
          petitioner apparently indicated that he “did not receive” or “did           
          not recall receiving the Statutory Notice of Deficiency”.  He was           
          therefore provided with an opportunity to present information for           
          reconsideration of the liability but submitted no substantiating            
          materials by a deadline established for that purpose.  At the               
          hearing on respondent’s motion, following a lengthy explanation             
          from the Court regarding certified mail procedures, petitioner              
          never expressly denied receiving either (1) notification of a               
          certified letter to be claimed or (2) the notice of deficiency              
          itself.  He merely stated that the IRS had been unable to “give *           







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

Last modified: May 25, 2011