Alan Lee and Debi Marie Kuykendall - Page 7




                                         -7-                                          
          Specifically, the taxpayer may “raise at the hearing challenges             
          to the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability for              
          any tax period if the person did not receive any statutory notice           
          of deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an           
          opportunity to dispute such tax liability.”  Id.                            
               “Receipt of a statutory notice of deficiency for this                  
          purpose means receipt in time to petition the Tax Court for a               
          redetermination of the deficiency asserted in the notice of                 
          deficiency.”  Sec. 301.6330-1(e)(3), Q&A-E2, Proced. & Admin.               
          Regs. Therefore, section 6330(c)(2)(B) contemplates actual                  
          receipt by the taxpayer.2  Tatum v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.                
          2003-115.                                                                   
               We have not previously addressed the issue of how much time            
          is required under section 301.6330-1(e)(3), Q&A-E2, Proced. &               
          Admin. Regs., for a taxpayer to petition this Court for                     
          redetermination of a deficiency.  However, we have addressed                
          similar questions in determining whether a taxpayer who failed to           
          file a timely petition with this Court was prejudiced by an                 
          improperly addressed notice.  Our decisions in those cases inform           
          our analysis of the current issue.                                          


               2If, however, the notice of deficiency was not received                
          because the taxpayers deliberately refused delivery, they may not           
          seek to challenge the underlying tax liability at a sec. 6330               
          hearing or before this Court.  Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C.               
          604, 611 (2000).  Respondent does not argue, nor would we find,             
          that petitioners deliberately refused delivery of the notice of             
          deficiency.                                                                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007