- 8 -
Ground has not been designated by the Commissioner as a PDS.
Notice 2004-83, supra. Thus, the timely mailing/timely filing
rule of section 7502 does not apply to UPS Ground service. See
Notice 2004-83, supra; Notice 97-26, 1997-1 C.B. 413.
Even if the timely mailing/timely filing rule of section
7502 did apply to UPS Ground service, we would still be
constrained to grant respondent’s motion and dismiss this case
for lack of jurisdiction. Pursuant to Notice 97-26, supra, the
date on which an item is recorded electronically to the database
of UPS is treated as the postmark date for purposes of section
7502. Extrinsic evidence would not be admissible to contradict
that postmark date. Austin v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-11.
In view of the foregoing, we hold that the petition in this
case was not timely filed pursuant to either section 6213(a) or
section 7502. Accordingly, we shall grant respondent’s Motion To
Dismiss For Lack Of Jurisdiction, and we shall dismiss this case
for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the petition was not
timely filed.4
4 We note that although petitioner cannot pursue a case in
this Court, he is not without a judicial remedy. Thus,
petitioner may pay the determined liabilities, file a claim for
refund with the Internal Revenue Service, and, if the claim is
denied, sue for a refund in the appropriate Federal District
Court or the United States Court of Federal Claims. See
McCormick v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 138, 142 (1970).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007