-10-
under 26 U.S.C. � 6303(a).” Elias v. Connett, 908 F.2d 521, 525
(9th Cir. 1990).
Petitioner argues that the declaration of Erin K. Huss
accompanying respondent’s motion for summary judgment is
insufficient to prove that “the Notices were mailed to the
Petitioner’s ‘last known address’ as required by � 6303.”
Petitioner claims that Ms. Huss “is not qualified to testify as
to what address the Notices may or may not have been mailed”
because “she has absolutely no personal knowledge of the facts
that would establish that the Notices were mailed.” We disagree
with petitioner that the declaration is deficient. The
declaration merely identifies documents contained in respondent’s
administrative file, all of which were submitted to the Court as
part of respondent’s motion for summary judgment. This argument
by petitioner is without merit.
For the foregoing reasons, we sustain respondent’s
determination as to the proposed levy as a permissible exercise
of discretion. We now turn to the requested penalty under
section 6673.
Section 6673(a)(1) authorizes the Court to require a
taxpayer to pay to the United States a penalty not in excess of
$25,000 whenever it appears that proceedings have been instituted
or maintained by the taxpayer primarily for delay or that the
taxpayer’s position in such proceeding is frivolous or
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011