- 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 evenPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011