- 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