- 9 -
view, petitioner did not exhaust his administrative remedies, and
we find no reason to delve into the other requirements.
Petitioner never requested an Appeals conference with
respondent although such a conference was available. Section
301.7430-1(b)(1), Proced. & Admin. Regs., provides that, where an
Appeals conference is available, administrative remedies are
exhausted only when the taxpayer (1) participates in an Appeals
conference before petitioning this Court, or (2) requested such a
conference (as applicable herein by filing a written protest with
respondent) and had his request denied. See Lloyd v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-299; see also Swanagan v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-294. Additionally, after filing
the petition, petitioner was contacted by the Appeals officer and
offered a post-petition Appeals conference. Petitioner declined
the opportunity to participate in the offered Appeals conference.
Petitioner asserts that he would have provided documentation
to respondent sufficient to satisfy the exhaustion of
administrative remedies requirement if only respondent had not
been hasty in issuing a notice of deficiency, and then, after the
petition had been filed, had respondent not quickly transferred
the case to the District Counsel’s Office. We find this argument
meritless. The fact is that petitioner and his attorney ignored
the 30-day letter. That letter set forth a clear deadline for
responding to the proposed changes. Petitioner failed to even
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011