Richard M. Downing - Page 31




                                        - 31 -                                        
          evidence that the IRS has complied with its statutory duties),              
          affg. 118 T.C. 365 (2002).                                                  
               The final notice of determination notes without comment that           
          the IRS processed a 1995 married filing separate Form 1040, U.S.            
          Individual Income Tax Return, that was not signed by either                 
          petitioner or the preparer.  The final notice of determination              
          goes on to state summarily:  “All legal and procedural                      
          requirements are concluded to have been met in this case.”  The             
          final notice of determination does not, however, reveal the basis           
          for this statement as it might pertain to the propriety of a                
          summary assessment made on the basis of the unsigned copy of the            
          1995 married filing separate return; indeed, the administrative             
          record does not show that the Appeals officer ever specifically             
          considered the issue.14  Respondent has offered no reasoned                 
          defense of his summary assessment of petitioner’s 1995 tax.  On             


               14 As previously discussed, the Appeals officer assumed, for           
          purposes of abating penalties and interest and reallocating                 
          certain payments, that petitioner filed a 1995 married filing               
          separate return in October 1996.  If we were to infer that the              
          Appeals officer meant to assume that petitioner’s 1995 married              
          filing separate return was filed in October 1996 for all                    
          purposes, this might explain why the Appeals officer would not              
          have felt it necessary to address whether summary assessment was            
          properly made on the basis of the unsigned copy of petitioner’s             
          1995 married filing separate return that the IRS received in                
          2001.  If we were to indulge the assumption, however, that                  
          petitioner filed a 1995 married filing separate return in October           
          1996, then we would have to agree with petitioner that the                  
          assessment in 2001 was outside the 3-year limitations period of             
          sec. 6501(a).  As previously discussed, both parties now agree              
          that petitioner filed no 1995 married filing separate return in             
          1996.                                                                       





Page:  Previous  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  32  33  34  35  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007