Crevenne C. and Barbara A. Carrillo - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         
                    A-D7.  The taxpayer must be offered an opportunity                
               for a hearing at the Appeals office closest to                         
               taxpayer’s residence or, in the case of a business                     
               taxpayer, the taxpayer’s principal place of business.                  
               If that is not satisfactory to the taxpayer, the                       
               taxpayer will be given an opportunity for a hearing by                 
               correspondence or by telephone.  If that is not                        
               satisfactory to the taxpayer, the Appeals officer or                   
               employee will review the taxpayer’s request for a CDP                  
               hearing, the case file, any other written                              
               communications from the taxpayer (including written                    
               communications, if any, submitted in connection with                   
               the CDP hearing), and any notes of any oral                            
               communications with the taxpayer or the taxpayer’s                     
               representative.  Under such circumstances, review of                   
               those documents will constitute the CDP hearing for the                
               purposes of section 6330(b).  [Sec. 301.6330-1(d)(2),                  
               Q&A-D6 and D7, Proced. & Admin. Regs.; see also sec.                   
               301.6320-1(d)(2), Q&A-D6 and D7, Proced. & Admin. Regs.                
               (substantially identical language except for final                     
               reference to “section 6320(b)”).]                                      
          This Court has cited the above regulatory provisions, and                   
          corresponding promulgations under section 6320, with approval.              
          See, e.g., Taylor v. Commissioner, supra; Leineweber v.                     
          Commissioner, supra; Dorra v. Commissioner, supra; Gougler v.               
          Commissioner, supra.                                                        
               With respect to the instant matter, the record reflects that           
          petitioners were provided with an opportunity for a face-to-face            
          hearing on September 11, 2003.  The hearing did not proceed when            
          petitioners were not permitted to record the meeting.  As                   
          explained in our previous order in this case, in Keene v.                   
          Commissioner, 121 T.C. 8, 19 (2003), this Court held that                   
          taxpayers are entitled, pursuant to section 7521(a)(1), to audio            
          record section 6330 hearings.  The taxpayer in that case had                






Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011