-9- Petitioners have failed to raise any arguments which have not been previously rejected by this Court.2 Thus, notwithstanding petitioners’ request to have a “meaningful hearing” under sections 6320 and 6330, we consider it neither necessary or productive to remand this case to Appeals to hold a hearing. Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 183 (2001). We sustain respondent’s notice of a lien filing and respondent’s determination as to the proposed levy as a permissible exercise of discretion. We have considered all arguments and have found those arguments not discussed herein to be irrelevant and/or without merit. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for respondent. 2 We also note that the Form 4340 received by petitioners is a valid verification that the requirements of any applicable law or administrative procedure have been met and is sufficient for the purposes of complying with the requirements of sec. 6330(c)(1). Roberts v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 365 (2002). Petitioners have not demonstrated in this proceeding any irregularity in the assessment procedure that would raise a question about the validity of the assessment or the information contained in Form 4340. See Mann v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-48.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Last modified: May 25, 2011