- 8 -
Once the Appeals officer has issued a determination
regarding the disputed collection action, section 6330(d) allows
the taxpayer to seek judicial review in the Tax Court or a
District Court. In considering whether taxpayers are entitled to
any relief from the Commissioner’s determination, this Court has
established the following standard of review:
where the validity of the underlying tax liability is
properly at issue, the Court will review the matter on
a de novo basis. However, where the validity of the
underlying tax liability is not properly at issue, the
Court will review the Commissioner’s administrative
determination for abuse of discretion. [Sego v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000).]
A. Review of Underlying Liability
Petitioner apparently seeks to challenge in this case the
existence of his underlying liability on grounds that the notice
of deficiency he received was invalid due to lack of a delegation
of authority from the Secretary to the Director of the Service
Center who issued the notice. This contention, however is
without merit. As this Court has explained:
The Secretary or his delegate may issue notices of
deficiency. Secs. 6212(a), 7701(a)(11)(B) and
(12)(A)(i). The Secretary’s authority to issue notices
of deficiency was delegated to the District Director
and also to the Director of the Service Center * * *. *
* * secs. 301.6212-1(a), 301.7701-9(b), Proced. &
Admin. Regs. * * * [Nestor v. Commissioner, 118 T.C.
162, 165 (2002).]
Accordingly, because petitioner received a valid notice of
deficiency and did not timely petition for redetermination, he is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011