- 5 -
I also reclassified the claim from an Equivalent
Hearing to a Collection Due Process Hearing. However,
you did not submit an amended return for 1996, nor did
you return the Installment Agreement form. These were
your alternatives to the proposed levy action. Without
your cooperation, the determination of the ACS function
is being upheld. The case file will be returned to
them for all appropriate action.
After receiving the notice of determination, on the advice
of the Appeals officer, petitioners made payments on their tax
liability to respondent. Mr. Brown sent respondent seven checks
and one money order totaling $850.
Petitioners’ balances for the years in issue were:
Year As of Outstanding Balance
1995 8/13/2001 $4,127.50
1996 10/22/2001 2,773.44
1997 6/4/2001 108.17
When this case was called for trial, petitioners failed to
appear. The Court set the case for recall during the second week
of the calendar in order to give petitioners an opportunity to
have their day in Court. Mr. Brown appeared at the recall.
OPINION
Petitioners do not dispute that the amount of the tax,
additions to tax, and interest assessed are correct. Pursuant to
the stipulations and deemed admissions, petitioners have conceded
their claim for interest abatement.
Petitioners argue that respondent should accept less than
the full amount of their liabilities because the additions to tax
and interest are too much for petitioners to pay on Mr. Brown’s
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011