John W. Hauck, Jr. - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         
          Roberts to represent petitioner for his 1980 through 1999 tax               
          years.                                                                      
               On April 26, 1999, Revenue Officer Henry Morrison mailed               
          petitioner and Mr. Roberts a copy of the Summary Record of                  
          Assessments, RACS Report (RACS report), for September 21, 1998,             
          an explanation of the RACS report by Disclosure Officer Michael             
          Ormond, petitioner’s Individual Master File Tax Module for 1995             
          and 1996, and petitioner’s literal transcript for 1995 and 1996.            
          These tax modules listed the assessment date for 1995 and 1996 as           
          September 21, 1998.                                                         
               On June 28, 1999, respondent mailed petitioner a Final                 
          Notice, Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a              
          Hearing, Form 1058, for 1995 and 1996.  Petitioner timely                   
          requested a hearing.  The only issues raised in petitioner’s                
          request for a hearing were the lack of a valid summary record of            
          assessment and the validity of the assessment.                              
               Appeals Officer Diane Villa mailed petitioner and his                  
          representatives a letter scheduling a hearing for July 27, 2000.            
          On July 12, 2000, petitioner’s representative called respondent             
          and requested that the hearing be held via the telephone.                   
               On July 27, 2000, Ms. Villa held a hearing via telephone               
          with Mr. Roberts.  Petitioner attempted to have a court reporter            
          present at the hearing and wanted the opportunity to cross-                 
          examine witnesses.  Respondent denied petitioner’s request to               






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011