Timothy Vincent Tipp - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          tax, the Court dismissed the petition for failure to state a                
          claim upon which relief can be granted.                                     
               In the instant case, the record indicates that, following an           
          Appeals Office hearing, respondent determined that he would                 
          proceed with collection against petitioner as to taxes due for              
          1991, and he would abate the assessments entered against                    
          petitioner for 1992.  Respondent asserts that the assessment for            
          1991 is based on the return as filed and that the tax, penalty,             
          and interest due for 1991 is the balance after application of a             
          credit applied from 1992 to 1991.  Petitioner does not dispute              
          this assertion.  Respondent did not issue a notice of deficiency            
          to petitioner for 1991, a circumstance which normally would                 
          permit petitioner to challenge his underlying tax liability for             
          1991 in this collection review proceeding.3  As was the case in             
          Goza v. Commissioner, supra, petitioner failed to raise a spousal           
          defense or challenge respondent's proposed levy by offering a               
          less intrusive means for collecting the taxes in either the                 
          Appeals Office hearing or in his petition for review filed with             
          the Court.  Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A).  Moreover, as indicated, the                


               3  Petitioner failed to assert a valid claim for relief.               
          See Landry v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 60 (2001), holding that the            
          Court had jurisdiction in a collection review proceeding,                   
          regardless of whether a deficiency was determined, where the                
          underlying liability related to Federal income tax.  Given the              
          nature of petitioner’s frivolous claims, we conclude that                   
          petitioner failed to assert a valid claim for relief as to the              
          underlying liability.                                                       





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011