- 10 -
Appeals Office hearing only if the person did not receive a
notice of deficiency for the taxes in question or did not
otherwise have an earlier opportunity to dispute the tax
liability. See Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 609 (2000);
Goza v. Commissioner, supra. Section 6330(d) provides for
judicial review of the administrative determination in the Tax
Court or a Federal District Court, as may be appropriate.
A. Summary Judgment
Petitioner challenges the assessment made against him on the
ground that he is not subject to the Federal income tax. The
record implies that petitioner received the notice of deficiency
for 1992 and disregarded the opportunity to file a petition for
redetermination with this Court. See sec. 6213(a). Under such
circumstances, section 6330(c)(2)(B) would bar petitioner from
challenging the existence or amount of his underlying tax
liability in this collection review proceeding.
Even if petitioner is permitted to challenge the amount of
his underlying liability, petitioner’s arguments are frivolous
and groundless. See Goza v. Commissioner, supra. Further, as
the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit has remarked: "We
perceive no need to refute these arguments with somber reasoning
and copious citation of precedent; to do so might suggest that
these arguments have some colorable merit." Crain v.
Commissioner, 737 F.2d 1417, 1417 (5th Cir. 1984). Suffice it to
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011