Clifford W. Miller - Page 8

                                                - 8 -                                                  
            respect to respondent’s motion.                                                            
                  The validity of the underlying tax liability for 1990 is not                         
            at issue here.  Consequently, we shall review the determinations                           
            set forth in the notice of determination under an abuse-of-                                
            discretion standard.  See Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610                          
                  In support of his position that the Appeals Office erred in                          
            determining that respondent may proceed to collect from him the                            
            unpaid portion of the assessed 1990 tax deficiency, petitioner                             
            argues that respondent should have given him notice of and an                              
            opportunity to participate in the administrative proceedings                               
            regarding Ms. Bacon’s application for relief from joint and                                
            several liability with respect to that deficiency and that                                 
            respondent should not have granted such relief to Ms. Bacon.                               
                  In respondent’s motion, respondent counters:                                         
                        7.  Petitioner does not have standing to challenge                             
                  respondent’s determination that his former wife is an                                
                  innocent spouse.  See Estate of Ravetti v. United                                    
                  States, 37 F.3d 1393 (9th Cir. 1994) and Garvey v.                                   
                  Commissioner, T.C. Memo. * * * [1993-354].                                           
                                *    *    *    *    *    *    *                                        
                        10.  In the instant case, *  *  * the Commissioner                             
                  granted innocent spouse relief to petitioner’s former                                
                  wife before the enactment of the Internal Revenue                                    
                  Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998.  Thus, peti-                                   
                  tioner’s former wife never made an election under                                    
                  I.R.C. � 6015(b) or (c), section 6015(e)(4) does not                                 
                  apply to this case, and the pre-1998 Act precedent of                                
                  Estate of Ravetti and Garvey, supra, forecloses peti-                                
                  tioner’s challenge to his former wife’s innocent spouse                              

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011