Dennis Stewart - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
               On September 18, 2000, respondent mailed petitioner a                  
          Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under               
          Section 6320 and/or 6330 (notice of determination) for 1990                 
          through 1998.  Respondent determined (1) the requirements of                
          applicable law and administrative procedures had been met, (2)              
          petitioner did not dispute the correctness of the underlying                
          liabilities for the years in issue, and (3) to proceed with                 
          collection.                                                                 
                                       OPINION                                        
               At trial, petitioner admitted that he did not dispute the              
          underlying liability at the section 6330 hearing; however, at               
          trial and on brief petitioner attempted to claim he was entitled            
          to additional deductions for some of the years in issue.  We                
          reject this claim for the following reasons:  (1) For 1990 and              
          1992 he is prevented from disputing his underlying liabilities              
          because respondent and petitioner reached an agreement as to                
          additional liabilities and these amounts were assessed, Aguirre             
          v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 324, 327 (2001), and (2) petitioner               
          presented no credible evidence that his underlying liabilities              
          for any of the years in issue were incorrect.  Smith v.                     
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-59.                                           
               Prior to 1994, petitioner owned the Emerson house.  During             
          1994, Fleet foreclosed on the Emerson house.  Fleet received all            
          the proceeds of the foreclosure sale.  Petitioner sued Fleet and            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011