Gary James Copeland - Page 9




                                        - 9 -                                         
               You have not challenged the appropriateness of the levy                
               action.  At your Collection Due Process Hearing you                    
               spoke about whether the assessment made was done so by                 
               one delegated with the authority to do so.  You stated                 
               you do not believe you received a proper Statutory                     
               Notice of Deficiency for the Secretary of the Treasury                 
               did not sign it.  I explained it [sic] the Statutory                   
               Notice of Deficiency does not have to be signed by the                 
               Secretary of the Treasury to be valid.  You have been                  
               previously given an opportunity to contest the amount                  
               assessed as income tax.  Due to fact you have had a                    
               previous opportunity the underlying liability is not to                
               be considered under the Collection Due Process.                        
               Review of the information stated above and now present                 
               in the administrative file shows the requirements of                   
               all applicable laws and administrative procedures have                 
               been met.  Assessments were properly made.  You were                   
               billed and did not pay the amounts due.  Collection                    
               proceeded with enforced collection and they should be                  
               allowed to continue.                                                   
               It is Appeals determination that the proposed collec-                  
               tion action balances the need for efficient collection                 
               of taxes with the legitimate concern that collection                   
               action is no more intrusive than necessary.                            
                                     Discussion                                       
               The Court may grant summary judgment where there is no                 
          genuine issue of material fact and a decision may be rendered as            
          a matter of law.  Rule 121(b); Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner,            
          98 T.C. 518, 520 (1992), affd. 17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994).                 
          We conclude that there is no genuine issue of material fact                 
          regarding the questions raised in respondent’s motion.                      
               With respect to petitioner’s taxable years 1997 and 1998,              
          petitioner received a notice of deficiency, but he did not file a           
          petition with respect to that notice.  In the petition, peti-               
          tioner admits that he received the notice of deficiency and                 





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011