- 5 -
Petitioners timely submitted a Form 12153, Request for a
Collection Due Process Hearing, with respect to the two notices.
They included with their Form 12153 an attachment in which they
disputed the validity of, and requested that the Appeals officer
have at the hearing copies of, documents pertaining to, among
other things, the underlying tax liability, the assessment, the
notice and demand for payment, and the verification from the
Secretary that the requirements of any applicable law or
procedure had been met. They concluded the attachment with the
following: “This is also to remind you that I will be tape
recording the CDP hearing. I will also have a court reporter,
and Irwin Schiff,[3] who has my power of attorney and who will be
assisting me.”
Respondent on February 11, 2003, issued to petitioners a
further Final Notice of Intent To Levy and Notice of Your Right
to a Hearing, pertaining to their 2000 tax year.4 Petitioners
again submitted a timely Form 12153 with an attachment
3 Irwin Schiff and his activities in protest of the tax laws
are well known to this Court. See, e.g., Schiff v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1992-183 (and cases cited therein).
4 Respondent also on Feb. 11, 2003, apparently in
inadvertence issued to petitioners’ bank a notice of levy with
respect to 1997, 1998, and 1999. However, the Appeals officer
handling petitioners’ case testified that the levy was released
on account of the pending collection hearing request.
Accordingly, this activity has no bearing on our review of the
specific collection actions that are the subject of the instant
proceeding and will not be further addressed, despite the
emphasis given thereto by petitioners at trial and on brief.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011