- 9 - did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute such tax liability. Once the Appeals officer has issued a determination regarding the disputed collection action, section 6330(d) allows the taxpayer to seek judicial review in the Tax Court or a District Court. In considering whether taxpayers are entitled to any relief from the Commissioner’s determination, this Court has established the following standard of review: where the validity of the underlying tax liability is properly at issue, the Court will review the matter on a de novo basis. However, where the validity of the underlying tax liability is not properly at issue, the Court will review the Commissioner’s administrative determination for abuse of discretion. [Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000).] II. Review of Underlying Tax Liabilities With respect to the case at bar, the initial inquiry is whether petitioner received the notice of deficiency sent on May 19, 1994. If petitioner did receive such notice, he was previously afforded an opportunity to challenge his underlying tax liabilities and failed to do so. Consequently, his underlying tax liabilities would not properly be at issue in this proceeding. See Sego v. Commissioner, supra at 609-610; Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 180-183 (2000). In his petition, petitioner contends that he never received the statutory notice. His trial memorandum, however, contains the recitation set forth below:Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011