-6-
determination. Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 37 (2000);
Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 179 (2000). In the event of
such a judicial review, the Court’s standard of review depends on
whether the underlying tax liability is at issue. The Court
reviews a taxpayer’s liability under the de novo standard where
the validity of the underlying tax liability is at issue. The
Court reviews 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 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).
In order to discern the issues in this case, we focus on
assignments of error set forth in the petition that commenced
this proceeding. Rule 331(b)(4) (“Any issue not raised in the
assignments of error shall be deemed to be conceded.”)
Petitioners assert in their petition the following 10 allegations
of error in the Appeals officer’s determination:
(1) Respondents Notice of Determination claims a
Determination. Petitioner denies having a
Determination (2) Respondents Notice of Determination
claims unreported and under reported income.
Petitioner denies having unreported or under reported
income. (3) Respondents IRS Form 4549, income tax
examination changes, claims a tax liability.
Petitioner denies having a tax liability. (4)
Respondent has failed to provide petitioner with
certified assessment information as per Internal
Revenue Regulation 301.6203-1. (5) Respondent claims a
Determination, but has failed to provide petitioner
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011