- 6 -
determined that it “should not restrict the appropriate
collection action.”
F. Petitioner’s Petition
On August 2, 2001, petitioner filed with the Court a
petition for lien or levy action seeking review of respondent’s
notice of determination.2 On October 12, 2001, petitioner filed
an amended petition which includes allegations that: (1) The
Appeals officer failed to obtain verification from the Secretary
that the requirements of any applicable law or administrative
procedure were met as required under section 6330(c)(1); and (2)
petitioner never received a notice and demand for payment of the
disputed taxes.
G. Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment
As indicated, respondent filed a Motion For Summary Judgment
And To Impose A Penalty Under I.R.C. Section 6673 asserting that
there is no dispute as to a material fact and that respondent is
entitled to judgment as a matter of law. In particular,
respondent contends that because petitioner received the notice
of deficiency dated October 7, 1999, he cannot challenge the
existence or amount of his underlying tax liabilities for 1995
and 1996 in this proceeding. Respondent further contends that
the Appeals officer’s review of transcripts of account, including
2 At the time that the petition was filed, petitioner
resided in Burley, Idaho.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011