- 7 -
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 609 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner,
supra. Section 6330(d) provides for judicial review of the
administrative determination in the Tax Court or a Federal
District Court, as may be appropriate.
Petitioners challenge the assessments entered against them
on the ground that the notice of deficiency dated October 15,
1999, is invalid. However, the record shows that petitioners
received the notice of deficiency and disregarded the opportunity
to file a petition for redetermination with the Court. It
follows that section 6330(c)(2)(B) bars petitioners from
challenging the existence or amount of their underlying tax
liability in this collection review proceeding.
Even if petitioners were permitted to challenge the validity
of the notice of deficiency, petitioners’ argument that the
notice is invalid because respondent’s District Director is not
properly authorized to issue notices of deficiency is frivolous
and groundless. See Nestor v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 162, 167
(2002); Goza v. Commissioner, supra. As the Court of Appeals for
the Fifth Circuit has remarked: “We perceive no need to refute
these arguments with somber reasoning and copious citation of
precedent; to do so might suggest that these arguments have some
colorable merit.” Crain v. Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417
(5th Cir. 1984).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011