- 28 -
basis of all the evidence in the record, we must concur with this
conclusion.
5. Summary Assessment of Petitioner’s 1995 Tax
This does not end the matter, however, for in seeking to
deflect petitioner’s limitations period argument, respondent now
contends, apparently for the first time in this proceeding, that
petitioner filed his 1995 married filing separate return in April
2001, when petitioner included in correspondence to the IRS an
unsigned copy of his 1995 married filing separate return (along
with a copy of a 1995 joint amended return signed only by the
preparer).13
In response to this argument, petitioner contends that in
his April 2001 correspondence, he admitted only the liability
shown on the copy of his and Astrid Downing’s 1995 amended joint
return included therewith and that he did not admit the liability
shown on the unsigned copy of his 1995 married filing separately
return. Petitioner contends that respondent improperly assessed
his 1995 tax on the basis of the unsigned copy of his 1995
married filing separate return without first issuing the required
statutory notice of deficiency. See sec. 6213(a).
Pursuant to section 6201(a)(1), the Secretary is authorized
to “assess all taxes determined by the taxpayer or by the
13 Respondent does not contend, however, that we should
modify those aspects of the final notice of determination that
treated petitioner as having filed a 1995 married filing separate
return in October 1996.
Page: Previous 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007