- 3 -
for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that petitioner is
precluded, under section 6330(c)(2)(B), from seeking relief
because he received statutory notices of deficiency with respect
to the taxable periods under consideration.
Discussion
Respondent seeks to have this matter dismissed, contending
that this Court does not have subject matter jurisdiction because
petitioner, under section 6330(c)(2)(B), is precluded from
challenging the underlying tax liability during the
administrative proceeding before the Appeals Office. We note
that this procedural question is the same for lien or levy
proceedings because section 6320(c), in pertinent part, causes
section 6330(c) and (d) to apply in connection with the conduct
of hearings concerning relief sought under section 6320.
The question of our jurisdiction in this type of situation
was recently addressed in Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. ___
(2000). In that case, we held that we have jurisdiction to
review respondent’s administrative determinations in lien and
levy matters involving circumstances similar to those that we
consider in this proceeding. See id. at ___ (slip op. at 10-11).
As in Goza, the only grounds raised by petitioner here concern
the underlying tax liabilities. In that regard, petitioner
contends that the underlying determinations are fraudulent and
that respondent had no authority to make the assessments. These
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011