- 4 -
to petitioners and informed them that he had scheduled a
collection conference for February 11, 2000. His letter further
stated that the conference would not extend the period during
which petitioners were required to file a petition for review
with the Tax Court regarding the determination letters dated
January 13, 2000.
On February 23, 2000, petitioners filed with the Court
separate petitions for review of respondent's determinations to
proceed with collection. The petitions arrived at the Court in a
single envelope bearing a U.S. Postal Service postmark date of
February 15, 2000. At the time the petitions were filed,
petitioners resided at Las Vegas, Nevada.
In response to the petitions, respondent filed Motions to
Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the alternative grounds: (1)
The petitions were not filed within the 30-day period prescribed
in section 6330(d)(1)(A); and (2) because the Court generally
lacks jurisdiction over the frivolous return penalty imposed
under section 6702, section 6330(d) bars the Court from reviewing
respondent's determination to collect such penalties.
Petitioners filed responses in opposition to respondent's
motions to dismiss. They assert that the determination letters
are invalid inasmuch as the Appeals Office issued the letters
without first conducting a hearing as mandated under section
6330(b). Petitioners’ responses are tantamount to (and will be
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011