- 9 -
that it was improper for the Appeals officer to rely on the Form
4340 to verify that the taxes in question were assessed.
Generally, courts have held that Form 4340 provides at least
presumptive evidence that a tax has been validly assessed under
section 6203. See Huff v. United States, 10 F.3d 1440, 1445 (9th
Cir. 1993); Hefti v. IRS, 8 F.3d 1169, 1172 (7th Cir. 1993); Farr
v. United States, 990 F.2d 451, 454 (9th Cir. 1993); Geiselman v.
United States, 961 F.2d 1, 5-6 (1st Cir. 1992); Rocovich v.
United States, 933 F.2d 991, 994 (Fed. Cir. 1991); United States
v. Chila, 871 F.2d 1015, 1017-1018 (11th Cir. 1989); United
States v. Miller, 318 F.2d 637, 638-639 (7th Cir. 1963).
“Certificates of Assessments and Payments are ‘routinely used to
prove that tax assessment has in fact been made.’ They are
‘presumptive proof of a valid assessment.’” Guthrie v. Sawyer,
970 F.2d 733, 737 (10th Cir. 1992) (quoting Geiselman v. United
States, supra at 6). The Form 4340 reflecting petitioner’s
income tax liabilities for the years in issue indicates that
those tax liabilities were properly assessed and remain unpaid.
Petitioner has not demonstrated any irregularity in the
assessment procedure that would raise a question about the
validity of the assessments. We therefore hold that it was not
an abuse of discretion for Appeals to rely on a Form 4340 in this
case for the purpose of complying with section 6330(c)(1).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011