- 11 - status of their case and that they gave their consent and approval to Mr. Mark’s acts. See Kraasch v. Commissioner, supra at 629. Accordingly, if Mr. Mark failed to file a petition with this Court on behalf of petitioners, any prejudice is attributable to the inaction of their agent. We hold that petitioners otherwise had an opportunity to dispute their underlying tax liability for 1991 through their representative. Thus, petitioners are not entitled to dispute their underlying tax liability for 1991. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B). D. Offer in Compromise As stated above, a taxpayer is entitled to notice before levy, including notice of the right to a fair hearing before an impartial officer of the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals. Secs. 6330(a) and (b), and 6331(d). If the taxpayer requests a hearing, he or she may raise in that hearing any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax or the proposed levy, including an offer in compromise. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A). A determination shall be made that shall take into consideration those issues, and “whether any proposed collection action balances the need for the efficient collection of taxes with the legitimate concern of the person that any collection action be no more intrusive than necessary.” Sec. 6330(c)(3)(C). In the instant case, petitioners question whether thePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011