- 14 -
Petitioners have not alleged any irregularity in the
assessment procedure that would raise a question about the
validity of the assessments or the information contained in the
Form 4340. See Davis v. Commissioner, supra at 41; Mann v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-48. Accordingly, we hold that the
Appeals officer satisfied the verification requirement of section
6330(c)(1). Cf. Nicklaus v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 117, 120-121
(2001).
Petitioners also contend that they never received a notice
and demand for payment for 1997. The requirement that the
Secretary issue a notice and demand for payment is set forth in
section 6303(a), which provides in pertinent part:
SEC. 6303(a). General Rule.-–Where it is not
otherwise provided by this title, the Secretary shall,
as soon as practicable, and within 60 days, after the
making of an assessment of a tax pursuant to section
6203, give notice to each person liable for the unpaid
tax, stating the amount and demanding payment thereof
* * *.
The Form 4340 that the Appeals officer relied on during the
administrative process shows that respondent sent petitioners a
notice of balance due on the same date that respondent made
assessments against petitioners for the tax and accuracy-related
8(...continued)
verification at the administrative hearing. Nestor v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 162, 166 (2002). In any event, in the
attachment (Form 3193) to the Notice of Determination, the
Appeals officer states that he provided petitioners with a
Summary Record of Assessment, which they declined to accept
“because the Secretary did not sign it.”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011