- 15 -
was valid although it referred in some places to the wrong
taxable year).
As their March 2006 letter to respondent’s counsel
indicates, the Hunters were not misled by the error in the notice
of deficiency. The Hunters recognized that the notice should
have referenced line 6d rather than line 6e. At trial,
Mr. Hunter conceded that the computation of the AMT was otherwise
correct. Thus, it appears that the Hunters understood the nature
of the contested item and were not prejudiced by the error. The
notice of deficiency therefore is valid, and its computation of
the AMT is conceded to be correct. See Hegarty v. Commissioner,
supra. Although the Hunters do not specifically raise the issue,
we note that the Commissioner can issue a notice of deficiency
after he has adjusted a taxpayer’s return based on mathematical
or clerical errors. See sec. 6213(b)(1); Heasley v.
Commissioner, 45 T.C. 448, 457 (1966); Ciciora v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2003-202.
The Hunters’ second argument is that a portion of the income
they received in 2002 represents nontaxable veteran’s benefits.
The Hunters provided two documents from the Department of
Veterans Affairs indicating that Mr. Hunter is entitled to
receive education benefits to attend law school. It is not clear
that Mr. Hunter received such benefits in 2002, however, or that
the Hunters reported such benefits as taxable income. As
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011