Terri Armstrong - Page 13




                                       - 13 -                                         
          See Fed. R. Evid. 103(a)(1); United States v. Jamerson, 549 F.2d            
          1263, 1266-1267 (9th Cir. 1977); Fuller v. Commissioner, 20 T.C.            
          308, 314 (1953), affd. 213 F.2d 102 (10th Cir. 1954).                       
               We turn now to the only other issue that petitioner on brief           
          asks us to address, i.e., “Whether the petitioner was entitled to           

               9(...continued)                                                        
               law and procedure.  That would mean that the hearing                   
               officer would have had some form of admissible evidence                
               available “at the hearing.”  Since the Certificates                    
               [Forms 4340 in question] the Respondent are [sic] now                  
               trying to use were created after scheduled date of the                 
               hearing, it is clear that they would not have been                     
               available “at the hearing” had it taken place.                         
               Petitioner’s objection to Forms 4340 in question does not              
          appear to be an evidentiary objection.  Petitioner seems to be              
          arguing that, because respective Forms 4340 with respect to                 
          petitioner’s taxable years 1992 and 1995 were generated as of               
          Mar. 15, 2002, a date after the dates on which the Appeals                  
          officer scheduled and rescheduled a telephonic hearing with                 
          petitioner (i.e., June 6, 2001, and June 7, 2001, respectively),            
          those forms may not be used to establish compliance with the                
          requirement of sec. 6330(c)(1) that “The appeals officer * * * at           
          the hearing obtain verification from the Secretary that the                 
          requirements of any applicable law or administrative procedure              
          have been met.”  We reject any such argument.  See Nestor v.                
          Commissioner, 118 T.C. 162 (2002).  In this connection, peti-               
          tioner’s objection to Forms 4340 in question appears to be based            
          on her misunderstanding as to what Form 4340 is.  Form 4340 is a            
          document or transcript that shows as of a stated date the infor-            
          mation as of that date with respect to a stated taxpayer regard-            
          ing assessments, payments, and other specified matters that                 
          appears as of that date in the official records of the IRS with             
          respect to that taxpayer.  That Form 4340 is generated as of a              
          stated date does not mean that the information reflected in such            
          form did not appear in the official records of the IRS before               
          such date.  In this regard, respective Forms 4340 with respect to           
          petitioner’s taxable years 1992 and 1995 reflect, and we have               
          found, that respondent assessed (1) on Nov. 25, 1996, tax, an               
          addition to tax, and interest with respect to petitioner’s                  
          taxable year 1995, and (2) on Feb. 22, 1999, tax and interest               
          with respect to petitioner’s taxable year 1992.                             





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011