- 7 -
relating to petitioner’s income tax liability for the taxable
year 1999, including the liability for the additions to tax. The
Appeals officer took the position in the notice of determination
that petitioner’s failure to file an income tax return for the
year 1999 supported the position that the proposed lien balance
should be sustained and prevented her from considering the
information petitioner submitted concerning his bases and
mortgage interest deductions.
On September 2, 2004, petitioner filed a timely petition in
this Court challenging the underlying liability for the taxable
year 1999.
OPINION
Respondent’s initial position is that petitioner failed to
accept the notice of deficiency for 1999 which was mailed to him,
and therefore he loses his right to pursue objections to the
underlying tax liability in this proceeding. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
Petitioner maintains he did not receive the notice of deficiency
and therefore he may contest the underlying tax liability in this
proceeding. We have found as fact that petitioner did not live
at either of the addresses to which the notice of deficiency was
sent and that he never received it. There was not a deliberate
refusal of delivery. These facts distinguish this case from Sego
v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604 (2000). While the notice of
deficiency was mailed to the last known address and is valid,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011