- 4 -
in this case was not received by the Court until January 22,
2007. Nonetheless, a petition that the Court receives and files
after the expiration of the 90-day period prescribed by section
6213(a) may be deemed timely filed under section 7502 and the
regulations thereunder.
Under section 7502 and the regulations thereunder, certain
documents, including a petition filed with the Court, may be
treated as timely filed when timely mailed (timely-mailing/
timely-filing rule). In the case of a petition filed with the
Court, the timely-mailing/timely-filing rule generally will apply
if the U.S. Postal Service postmark appearing on the envelope in
which the petition was mailed falls within the period prescribed
by section 6213(a). See sec. 7502(a)(2). The timely-mailing/
timely-filing rule applies where a postmark is entirely omitted.
Sylvan v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 548 (1975). Where, as is the
case here, the envelope containing the petition that the Court
received does not bear a U.S. Postal Service postmark (or any
other postmark), a taxpayer may offer extrinsic evidence to
establish the date of the mailing of such envelope. Id. at 553-
554.
The Court held an evidentiary hearing on respondent’s motion
at which Mr. Dahne was the only witness. Mr. Dahne testified
that he mailed the envelope containing the petition at approxi-
mately 5:30 p.m. on January 16, 2007. According to Mr. Dahne’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007