- 3 -
underlying liability.1 Nevertheless, on or about June 13, 2001,
the Appeals officer advised petitioner that he would postpone
issuing a notice of determination in order to allow her to submit
a request to respondent’s Examination Division for audit
reconsideration of her 1996 tax liability. However, petitioner
apparently failed to do so, and, on August 31, 2001, the Appeals
Office issued its Notice of Determination sustaining respondent’s
proposed collection action.
On October 1, 2001, petitioner filed with the Court a
Petition for Lien or Levy Action seeking review of respondent’s
notice of determination.2 The only issue raised in the petition
is a challenge to petitioner’s underlying tax liability.
As previously stated, respondent filed a Motion To Dismiss
For Failure To State A Claim Upon Which Relief Can Be Granted.
Respondent contends that petitioner is barred by section
6330(c)(2)(B) from challenging the existence or amount of her tax
liability in this collection review proceeding because she
received a notice of deficiency.
Petitioner filed a Response, objecting to respondent’s
motion. In her Response, petitioner alleges that she “never had
1 Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and all Rule references
are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
2 At the time that the petition was filed, petitioner
resided in Pittsburgh, Pa.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011