- 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 casePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011