- 8 -
consists of a single-page, standardized Tax Court form. The
lengthiest portion of the form petition, on which petitioner set
forth the relief requested and his reasons therefor, consists of
six sentences. Therein, petitioner disputes the notice of
deficiency's determination that he failed to file a return for
2002,4 as well as the notice's treatment of two real estate
transactions.
Considering the record as a whole, we are not persuaded that
petitioner was prejudiced by the 16-day delay in receiving the
notice of deficiency. Given the relative simplicity of the
petition he filed, petitioner had ample time to prepare and file
it when he received the notice of deficiency. Consequently,
petitioner's receipt of the notice of deficiency 16 days after it
was mailed did not constitute prejudicial delay.
We hold that the notice of deficiency herein is valid.
Accordingly, respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of
jurisdiction will be granted, and this case will be dismissed for
4 The petition asserts that "On April 15, 2002, a 2002
MARRIED FILING JOINTLY Taxpayer return was filed [sic]". (We
assume that petitioner meant to aver that he timely filed the
return on Apr. 15, 2003.) Respondent asserts in his response to
petitioner's objection to the motion to dismiss that "On January
12, 2007, after issuance of the Notice of Deficiency for the 2002
tax year at issue in this case, respondent's service center in
Andover received from petitioner and his spouse a Form 1040 for
the tax year ending December 31, 2002." Petitioner thereafter
apparently abandoned his claim of having filed timely; he has
subsequently failed to address respondent's allegation that a
Form 1040 for 2002 was not received until Jan. 12, 2007.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007