- 15 -
opportunity for an Appeals conference, such refusal or failure,
considered alone, would not have rendered the second notice of
deficiency or the ensuing assessment invalid. See Cupp v.
Commissioner, 65 T.C. 68 (1975), affd. without published opinion
559 F.2d 1207 (3d Cir. 1977); see also Wisniewski v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1989-60. Accordingly, petitioners are
not entitled to question the merits of the underlying tax
liability for their 1995 tax year.
With respect to the 1996 and 1997 tax liabilities,
petitioners reported income tax liabilities, which respondent was
entitled to and did assess. We surmise that respondent permitted
petitioners to question the underlying merits of those
liabilities because they did not have that opportunity before the
proposed collection activity. See, e.g., Horn v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2002-207. When the validity of the underlying tax
liability is properly in issue, we review the matter on a de novo
basis. See Hoffman v. Commissioner, supra; Sego v. Commissioner,
supra.
Petitioners “self-assessed” the 1996 and 1997 tax
liabilities by reporting such liabilities on their income tax
returns. The liability arose from Mr. Anderson’s reported income
from his fishing activity. The Appeals officer suggested that
petitioners file amended tax returns for 1996 and 1997 if they
wished to claim that they were not liable for tax.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011