- 11 -
penalties applied under section 6662--was not properly abated and
adjusted in accordance with the agreement they reached with
respondent’s Problem Resolution Office. We will first consider
the merits of these arguments.
Petitioners’ Right To Contest the Underlying Liability
The Court’s jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency depends
upon the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and the timely
filing of a petition for redetermination. Levitt v.
Commissioner, 97 T.C. 437, 441 (1991). Assuming the Commissioner
has issued a valid deficiency notice, section 6213(a) provides in
pertinent part that the taxpayer must file a petition with the
Court within 90 days of the mailing of the deficiency notice.
Respondent mailed a deficiency notice to petitioners on
December 6, 1996. It is undisputed that petitioners received
this notice in due course. Petitioners failed to file a petition
for redetermination within 90 days of the date the notice was
mailed. Because petitioners’ reasons as to why they did not file
a petition are irrelevant,11 we hold that petitioners are not
entitled to raise as an issue their underlying tax liability.
11 Petitioners admit their timely receipt of the notice.
They stated that the declining health of Mr. Caple’s father, and
other factors, left them unable to deal with the situation.
“Once respondent places the deficiency notice within the
taxpayer’s grasp * * * [in ample time to file a petition with the
Tax Court, respondent] satisfies the requirement of section 6212;
if the taxpayer turns a blind eye to that information, she does
so at her own peril.” Patmon & Young Profl. Corp., T.C. Memo.
1993-143, affd. 55 F.3d 216 (6th Cir. 1995).
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008