- 15 -
to Davis v. Commissioner, supra, applicable Treasury regulations,
and the historical function of the Appeals Office, petitioner did
not have the right to examine witnesses under oath during the
Appeals hearing.13 Davis v. Commissioner, supra, undermines
petitioner’s argument that he was entitled to an Appeals hearing
in West Palm Beach because traveling to Sunrise, Florida, for his
Appeals hearing would impose a burden on his witnesses.
On the basis of the entire record and applicable law, we
conclude that the Appeals officer has complied with the
requirements of section 6320(b) by providing petitioner an
opportunity for an Appeals hearing.
Because of petitioner’s insistence on an Appeals hearing in
West Palm Beach, Florida, the Appeals officer attempted to
accommodate petitioner by offering to discuss his case over the
telephone. From the record, we conclude that petitioner and the
Appeals officer did in fact discuss his case over the telephone
and that the Appeals officer heard and considered petitioner’s
arguments. We thus further conclude that, through the
communications between petitioner and the Appeals officer in the
instant case, petitioner received an Appeals hearing as provided
for in section 6320(b).
12(...continued)
of perjury. * * *
13 Petitioner, however, could have submitted facts in the
form of affidavits or declarations under penalties of perjury.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011