- 10 -
taxpayer a hearing at the Appeals Office located nearest the
taxpayer's residence. We further concluded that, where the
taxpayer had declined to attend the scheduled hearing on the
ground that the location of the Appeals Office would impose an
undue burden on his witnesses, the taxpayer nevertheless received
an acceptable Appeals Office hearing by way of a telephone
conference with the Appeals officer. See id. at ___ (slip op. at
15); see Davis v. Commissioner, supra (an Appeals Office hearing
does not include the right to subpoena or examine witnesses).
The record in this case shows that the Appeals Office did
not provide petitioners with an opportunity for a hearing either
in person or by telephone prior to issuing the disputed
determination letters. Consistent with the plain language of
section 6330(b), we conclude that the disputed determination
letters are invalid. The Appeals officer's attempt to invest the
determination letters with legitimacy by scheduling a conference
with petitioners after the issuance of the determination letters
was too late in light of the clear mandate of section 6330.
Accordingly, we shall deny respondent's Motions to Dismiss
for Lack Jurisdiction, as supplemented, and we shall dismiss
these cases on the ground that the determination letters are
invalid.
To reflect the foregoing,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011