- 11 -
Accordingly, where the validity of the underlying tax liability
is properly at issue, the Court will review the matter on a
de novo basis. However, where the validity of the underlying tax
liability is not properly at issue, the Court will review the
Commissioner's administrative determination for abuse of
discretion.
In Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176 (2000), we concluded
that the taxpayer had failed to raise a valid challenge to
respondent’s proposed levy before the Appeals Office and had
continued to assert frivolous constitutional claims in his
petition for review filed with this Court. Insofar as the
petition seeks relief with respect to Steven Sego, the reasoning
of Goza is applicable. Steven Sego received the statutory notice
of deficiency in time to file a petition but repudiated that
right by returning to respondent the statutory notice with
frivolous language on it. He did not file a petition, and the
express language of section 6330(c)(2)(B) precludes de novo
review of his tax liability in this proceeding.
Davina Sego did not actually receive a statutory notice of
deficiency. She contends that the statutory notice and the
notices of attempted delivery of certified mail are “fabricated”,
but she also asserts that she would have responded to them in the
same manner as her husband. Thus, she has aligned herself with
the pattern reflected in the record of rejecting mail from the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011