- 9 -
In this case, notices of deficiency were issued to and were
received by petitioner for all the tax years involved. Moreover,
petitions were filed in this Court with respect to all the years
involved in this case. For the years 1989, 1990, and 1991, a
decision was entered by this Court against petitioner, which has
never been modified, vacated, or set aside. With regard to the
1994 tax year, petitioner also initiated an action in this Court
with his spouse, as to which he was dismissed because of his
pending bankruptcy. When petitioner was later discharged in the
bankruptcy proceeding, he could have petitioned this Court with
respect to the 1994 tax year. Petitioner never did that, and he
was subsequently assessed by respondent for the deficiencies and
penalty. The positions taken by petitioner with respect to
respondent's collection action and this appeal all relate to his
questioning the existence and the amount of his underlying tax
liabilities. Because petitioner received notices of deficiency
for the taxes in question and did in fact challenge in one case
and attempted to challenge the deficiencies in another case, he
is precluded from again challenging the underlying deficiencies
and penalties in a collection proceeding under section 6330(c).
Since petitioner did not offer any of the available remedies
under section 6330(c), respondent's motion to dismiss this case
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011