- 14 -
waiver by respondent of the time restrictions within which
petitioner was required to request an Appeals Office hearing
under section 6330.
3. Decision Letter
On August 17, 2000, following the equivalent hearing, the
Appeals Office issued a decision letter to petitioner stating
that respondent would proceed with collection. Petitioner
contends that the decision letter is tantamount to a valid
determination letter under section 6330(d).
Petitioner’s position ignores the unambiguous statement in
the decision letter that the equivalent hearing was not intended
to serve as an Appeals Office hearing within the meaning of
section 6320 or 6330. As previously discussed, because
petitioner failed to file a timely request for an Appeals Office
hearing, the Appeals Office was not obliged to conduct such a
hearing. In this regard, the decision letter was not, and did
not purport to be, a determination letter pursuant to section
6320 or section 6330. See Offiler v. Commissioner, supra at 495.
In sum, we hold that respondent did not issue a
determination letter to petitioner sufficient to invoke the
Court’s jurisdiction to review the notice of intent to levy.
Insofar as the petition filed herein purports to be a petition
for review pursuant to section 6330(d), we will dismiss the
petition for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that respondent
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011