- 7 -
petitioner had requested, and (2) Owens arranged for the
attendance at the hearing by the person who declared petitioners’
Forms 1040X, Amended U.S. Individual Income Tax Return, to be
frivolous and by the person who made the decision to levy
petitioners’ property without a court order.
C. Respondent’s Notice of Determination
On November 2, 2000, respondent sent petitioners a notice of
determination concerning collection actions in which respondent
determined to proceed with collection from petitioners of the
frivolous return penalty for 1994, 1995, and 1996, and told
petitioners that they have 30 days to file a complaint in the
appropriate U.S. District Court for a redetermination. The
notice of determination appeared valid on its face. Petitioners
timely filed in this Court an appeal of respondent’s
determination. On January 2, 2001, petitioners filed with the
Court an amended petition for lien or levy action under section
6320(c) or section 6330(d).
Discussion
A. Whether the Tax Court Has Jurisdiction To Review
Respondent’s Determination Under Sections 6320 and 6330
We have previously held that we lack jurisdiction under
section 6330(d)(1)(A) to review the Commissioner’s determination
to collect by levy the frivolous return penalty under section
6702. Van Es v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. at 328-329. That case
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011