-15-
reviews a taxpayer’s liability under the de novo standard where
the validity of the underlying tax liability is at issue. The
Court reviews the other administrative determinations for abuse
of discretion. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000).
A taxpayer’s underlying tax liability may be at issue only if he
or she “did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for
such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to
dispute such tax liability.” Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
With respect to 1990, 1991, and 1992, petitioner received a
notice of deficiency and petitioned the Court with respect
thereto. It follows that petitioner’s underlying tax liability
for 1990, 1991, and 1992 is not at issue. Accordingly, we review
respondent’s determination for these years for abuse of
discretion.
With respect to 1995, petitioner neither received a notice
of deficiency nor had an opportunity to dispute the underlying
tax liability. Whereas the Appeals officer did not allow
petitioner to raise at the equivalent hearing the underlying tax
liability for that year, respondent now recognizes that it was
error to do so (i.e., to not allow petitioner to dispute the
underlying tax liability for 1995). See Hoffman v. Commissioner,
119 T.C. 140 (2002). We review petitioner’s underlying tax
liability for 1995 on a de novo basis.
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011