- 12 -
consideration along with the surrounding circumstances, we must
decide in this case whether petitioner could have been reasonably
confused or misled as to the taxable year involved.
The facts and circumstances in this case lead us to conclude
that the notice of deficiency is valid because it contained
enough information such that petitioner could not reasonably be
deceived as to the taxable period involved (calendar year 1996).
Both the explanation of changes and the additional attached
schedule contain figures that are directly traceable to
petitioner’s 1996 gift tax return, including the value of the
gifts as shown on the return and the amount of tax previously
paid. The additional schedule, though it does not indicate any
dates for the taxable period involved, details the three gifts
that petitioner made in 1996. This schedule lists each donee of
the 1996 gifts, the percentage of the Upchurch Family Limited
Partnership given to each donee, the value of the gifts as
reflected on petitioner’s 1996 gift tax return, and the corrected
values of each gift, which also match the examiner’s report for
1996. The cover page of the notice and attachments asserted the
exact same amount of deficiency as was proposed in the previously
sent 30-day letter for calendar year 1996. The adjustments and
computations in the attached explanation of tax changes are also
identical to those in the examiner’s report for calendar year
1996.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007