- 3 -
B. & Donna McDermott v. Commissioner, docket No. 16240-04L.
On May 18, 2005, in the above collection case, we granted a
motion for summary judgment that respondent had filed against
petitioner. In the order granting respondent’s summary judgment
and dismissal of petitioner’s collection case, we warned
petitioner that a penalty under section 6673 would be considered
if petitioner continued to make frivolous arguments.
Under section 6213(a), generally a petition must be filed
relating to a notice of deficiency within 90 days of the mailing
of the notice of deficiency to a taxpayer.
On September 25, 2006, more than 6 years after respondent
mailed the above notice of deficiency to petitioner and his wife,
petitioner filed his petition herein. Respondent’s motion to
dismiss is based on petitioner’s late petition.
In opposition, petitioner admits the untimeliness of his
petition, but petitioner argues that we still have jurisdiction
to rule on the validity of respondent’s notice of deficiency, and
petitioner argues that respondent’s notice of deficiency
erroneously charges to him income of a TEFRA partnership. Based
thereon, petitioner argues that the income charged to him in
respondent’s notice of deficiency should have been charged to him
by respondent in a TEFRA partnership proceeding utilizing a
Notice of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment, and
petitioner argues that respondent’s motion to dismiss should be
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007