Dudley and Dorothy Moorhous - Page 1
















                                   116 T.C. No. 20                                    


                               UNITED STATES TAX COURT                                


                     DUDLEY AND DOROTHY MOORHOUS, Petitioners v.                      
                     COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent                     


               Docket No. 10761-00L.                  Filed April 23, 2001.           


                    On Mar. 16, 1999, R mailed to P-H a final notice                  
               of intent to levy concerning P-H’s unpaid tax                          
               liabilities for the years 1987 through 1992 and 1997.                  
               On Apr. 27, 1999, R mailed to P-W a final notice of                    
               intent to levy concerning P-W’s unpaid tax liabilities                 
               for the years 1989 through 1992.  On May 10, 1999, Ps                  
               filed a joint request for an administrative hearing                    
               with the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals                    
               (Appeals Office).  P-H failed to file his request for                  
               an administrative hearing within the 30-day period                     
               prescribed in sec. 6330, I.R.C.                                        
                    Despite P-H’s failure to file a timely request for                
               an Appeals Office hearing, R granted P-H a so-called                   
               equivalent hearing.  P-W was granted an administrative                 
               hearing pursuant to sec. 6330, I.R.C.  On Oct. 6, 2000,                
               R issued a “decision letter” to P-H stating that R                     
               would proceed with collection against him.  On Oct. 6,                 
               2000, R issued a determination letter to P-W stating                   
               that R would proceed with collection against her and                   





Page:   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011