- 7 - the Code, has occurred under the provisions of Subchapter B of the Code, including Section 6215.” We disagree.7 It is clear that a section 6215 assessment did not and could not occur in this case. Section 6215 requires a petition filed by the taxpayer with the Tax Court and an amount redetermined as the deficiency by a decision of the Tax Court which has become final.8 Our jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency arises only in the case of a valid notice of deficiency and the filing of a timely petition for review under section 6213(a). Savage v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 46, 48 (1999); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989).9 7The mere prospect, assuming one does exist here, of a sec. 6215 assessment’s being made is not sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon this Court for purposes of sec. 7481(c). Sec. 7481(c)(2)(A)(i) requires that “an assessment has been made”, not “will be made” or “should have been made”. A motion to redetermine interest which is based on the mere prospect of a sec. 6215 assessment would be premature. 8Sec. 6215 provides: SEC. 6215(a). General Rule.--If the taxpayer files a petition with the Tax Court, the entire amount redetermined as the deficiency by the decision of the Tax Court which has become final shall be assessed and shall be paid upon notice and demand from the Secretary. No part of the amount determined as a deficiency by the Secretary but disallowed as such by the decision of the Tax Court which has become final shall be assessed or be collected by levy or by proceeding in court with or without assessment. 9Sec. 6230(a)(2)(A)(i) does not discharge the necessary requirements that must exist for the deficiency procedures to apply, and, indeed, that provision incorporates subch. B (subtit. F, ch. 63 of the Code) in its entirety.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011