Virgil B. Elings v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue

Good Law
2003 Daily Journal DAR 3853·324 F.3d 1110·1 U.S. Tax Cas. (CCH) 50,357·91 A.F.T.R.2d (RIA) 1648·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 3008
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitApril 8, 200302-70457California1,795 words

Opinion

Opinion

Nelson, J.

Virgil Elings appeals the tax court’s denial of his motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. We hold that when the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) fails to include the last date to petition the tax court for a redetermination on its notice of deficiency, but the taxpayer suffers no prejudice, the notice is valid. Thus, the tax court’s jurisdiction was proper, and we affirm.

1. FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Virgil Elings filed a gift tax return in 1995, reporting a gift of stock valued at upwards of $2.5 million. On August 3, 1998, the IRS sent a notice of deficiency to Elings, indicating that he owed substantial additional taxes because the actual value of the gifted stock was more than twice what Elings reported. The notice was dated and indicated that Elings had ninety days in which to file a petition to contest the deficiency. However, it failed to include the calculated date by which Elings had to file the petition (the “calculated date”). Elings did not need the IRS’s help to determine when he needed to file his petition. He timely filed and requested a redetermination of the deficiency. He also contested jurisdiction, arguing that the IRS’s failure to include…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.