Peter J. Tkac - Page 3




                                        - 2 -                                         
               On March 13, 2000, respondent issued to petitioner a Notice            
          of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section              
          6320 and/or 6330.  The collection activity concerned petitioner’s           
          assessed and unpaid 1992 income tax liability and frivolous                 
          income tax return penalties for the 1994, 1995, and 1996 tax                
          years pursuant to section 6702(a).  Petitioner, on March 27,                
          2000, petitioned this Court requesting that we vacate                       
          respondent’s March 13, 2000, determination; require that                    
          respondent conduct a proper collection due process hearing; and             
          order respondent to provide petitioner with the documents that              
          petitioner had requested.  At the time he filed his petition,               
          petitioner resided in Gaithersburg, Maryland.                               
               Petitioner, on May 21, 2001, moved to dismiss on the ground            
          that respondent’s determination is invalid because respondent did           
          not provide petitioner with a hearing as defined in the statute.            
          Respondent on June 7, 2001, before the hearing scheduled for                
          petitioner’s motion, moved to dismiss for lack of this Court’s              
          jurisdiction and to strike as to the section 6702 frivolous                 
          return penalties for 1994, 1995, and 1996.  At the hearing on the           
          parties’ motions, respondent conceded petitioner’s unpaid 1992              
          income tax liability.                                                       
               If the Court otherwise has jurisdiction over a case, a full            
          concession by the Commissioner as to the amount in dispute does             
          not cause the Court to lose jurisdiction; the Court would not               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011