- 10 -
inter alia, that section 6330(c)(2)(B) barred the taxpayers from
challenging the existence or amount of their underlying tax
liability in the judicial proceeding.
Respondent maintains that section 6330(c)(2)(B) remains a
bar to petitioner’s attempt in the present proceeding to
challenge the amount of his underlying liability for 1993.
Specifically, respondent cites and relies on section 301.6320-
1(e)(3), Q&A-E11, Proced. & Admin. Regs.3 The regulation states
as follows:
Q-E11. If an Appeals officer considers the merits
of a taxpayer’s liability in a CDP hearing when the
taxpayer had previously received a statutory notice of
deficiency or otherwise had an opportunity to dispute
the liability prior to the NFTL [notice of Federal tax
lien], will the Appeals officer’s determination
regarding those liability issues be considered part of
the Notice of Determination?
A-E11. No. An Appeals officer may consider the
existence and amount of the underlying tax liability as
a part of the CDP hearing only if the taxpayer did not
receive a statutory notice of deficiency for the tax
liability in question or otherwise have a prior
opportunity to dispute the tax liability. Similarly,
an Appeals officer may not consider any other issue if
the issue was raised and considered at a previous
3 The regulation applies to any notice of Federal tax lien
that is filed on or after Jan. 19, 1999. Sec. 301.6320-1(j),
Proced. & Admin. Regs. The lien in the present case was filed on
Aug. 28, 2000.
We note that the final regulation added Q&A-E11 to sec.
301.6320-1(e)(3), Proced. & Admin. Regs., which Q&A had not
previously been part of the temporary regulation. See sec.
301.6320-1T(e)(3), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 64 Fed. Reg.
3403 (Jan. 22, 1999); see also T.D. 8979, 2002-6 I.R.B. 466,
468(discussing the addition of Q&A-E11 to the final regulation).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011