- 5 -
Please be advised the courts have consistently and
repeatedly rejected the arguments expressed in your
letters and in many cases have imposed sanctions. In
Pierson v. Commissioner [Dec. 54, 152], * * * [115 T.C.
576 (2000)], the Court issued fair warning of penalties
under section 6673 to all those taxpayers who, in the
future, institute or maintain a lien or levy action
primarily for delay or whose position in such a pro-
ceeding is frivolous or groundless and has in fact
imposed a penalty in a number of such cases. (Please
see enclosed Exhibit A) [list of cases showing imposi-
tion of section 6673]
Pursuant to Sections 6320 and 6330 of the Internal
Revenue Code, Section 6320(c) discusses matters consid-
ered at the hearing. Section 6330(c)(2)(B) precludes
any challenge to the underlying liability, at the
hearing, for any period, if the person received a
statutory notice of deficiency or otherwise had an
opportunity to dispute the liabilities.
The Appeals officer enclosed with the Appeals officer’s January
5, 2004 letter a copy of a TXMODA transcript with respect to
petitioner’s taxable year 1999.
On February 4, 2004, petitioner sent a letter (petitioner’s
February 4, 2004 letter) to respondent’s Appeals Office, which
stated in pertinent part:
In my numerous responses to the IRS I have re-
quested to have a hearing, as provided for in proce-
dures and Regulations (601.105(b)(1) thru
601.105(d)(2)(i)) but as of yet I have been offered
none. Now for exact purpose that the ‘Restructuring
and Reform Act of 1998' was enacted into law, I am
again being denied.
A hearing as called for in IRC Sec 6330(b)(1) “if
the person requests a hearing under subsection
(a)(3)(B), such hearing shall be held by the Internal
Revenue Service Office of Appeals.”. Further more in
the US District Court Case of ‘MESA OIL, INC., Plain-
tiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. Civil
Action No. 00-B-851', Nov. 21, 2000 wherein I quote
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011