- 22 -
assessment against another taxpayer. When respondent
acknowledged that no tax was due by the assessed taxpayer, rather
than releasing the levied funds, respondent retained the funds
for petitioner's account. The facts demonstrate that there was
no "asserted tax" liability against petitioner at the time
respondent decided the levied funds would be held for
petitioner's account. Petitioner never agreed to an assessment
nor to a tax liability. The Court concludes, therefore, that
respondent's levy of funds pursuant to an assessment against
another taxpayer, but held by respondent for the account of a
taxpayer who has not been assessed, does not constitute a
"payment" of an asserted tax liability by the taxpayer who has
not been assessed. Consequently, petitioner has not made a
"payment" of taxes with respect to the levied amounts held by
respondent for petitioner's account. Thus we hold that there
were no overpayments for the years in issue. This does not mean,
however, that petitioner is not entitled to a return of the
amount by which the levied funds will exceed petitioner's tax
liabilities after the decision in this case becomes final, and
the amounts due and owing by petitioner are assessed and
satisfied by application of the levied funds in respondent's
possession. Under section 6342 and the regulations thereunder,
any surplus proceeds shall, upon application and satisfactory
proof thereof, be credited or refunded to the person legally
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011