-5-
Section 6330 generally provides that the Commissioner cannot
proceed with collection by levy until the person has been given
notice and the opportunity for an administrative review of the
matter (in the form of an Appeals Office hearing) and, if
dissatisfied, with judicial review of the administrative
determination. Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 37 (2000);
Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 179 (2000). In the case of
such judicial review, the Court will review a taxpayer’s
liability de novo where the validity of the underlying tax
liability is at issue. The Court will review the Commissioner’s
administrative determination for abuse of discretion in all other
cases. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000). A
taxpayer may challenge “the existence or amount of the underlying
tax liability for any tax period if the * * * [taxpayer] 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); Smith v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2002-59.
Petitioner’s only allegation in his petition is that
respondent failed to send the statutory notice of deficiency for
19853 to petitioner’s “last known address.” If petitioner did
3 Even though a notice of determination was issued to
petitioner for 1985 and 1986, we conclude that petitioner’s
allegation pertains solely to 1985; petitioner not only received
a notice of deficiency for 1986, but he petitioned the Court with
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011