- 5 -
Petitioner further contends that respondent did not make a lawful
assessment on a Form 23 C, Summary Record of Assessment, that was
signed and dated by an assessment officer with duly delegated
authority. We disagree.
The Appeals officer properly used a Form 4340 to verify the
assessments of the taxes in issue. A Form 4340 is presumptive
evidence that a tax has been validly assessed under section 6203.
Nicklaus v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 117, 121 (2001); Davis v.
Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 40 (2000); see also Huff v. United
States, 10 F.3d 1440, 1445 (9th Cir. 1993); Hefti v. IRS, 8 F.3d
1169, 1172 (7th Cir. 1993); Geiselman v. United States, 961 F.2d
1, 5-6 (1st Cir. 1992); United States v. Chila, 871 F.2d 1015,
1017-1018 (11th Cir. 1989). Petitioner has not alleged any
irregularity in the assessment procedure that would raise a
question as to the validity of the assessment. Even though
petitioner asked the Appeals officer for a Form 23 C, it was not
an abuse of discretion for the Appeals officer to use Forms 4340
for purposes of complying with section 6330(c)(1). See Lunsford
v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. No. 159 (2001); Nicklaus v.
Commissioner, supra at 122 n.7; Davis v. Commissioner, supra at
41.
2. Explanation of Appeals and Collection Process
Petitioner alleges that respondent did not provide him with
an explanation of the appeals and collection process as required
by section 3504 of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011