Daniel E. Duncan - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         
          them to be without merit and/or irrelevant.10                               
               On the record before us, we shall grant respondent’s motion.           
               To reflect the foregoing,                                              
                                             An order granting respondent’s           
                                        motion and decision will be entered           
                                        for respondent.                               

               10We note that in petitioner’s response petitioner contends            
          that “the law (26USC 7521) [sic] clearly provides that Petitioner           
          had a right to tape the CDP hearing at issue” and that he “is               
          entitled to a summary judgment just on the ground that he was               
          denied the right to make a tape recording & a stenographic                  
          recording.”  We shall not address petitioner’s contention.  That            
          is because, assuming arguendo that sec. 7521(a)(1) were applica-            
          ble in the case of an Appeals Office hearing under sec.                     
          6320(b)(1) and/or sec. 6330(b)(1), the record does not establish            
          that petitioner complied with the requirement of sec. 7521(a)(1)            
          that he present respondent with his request to make an audio                
          recording of his Appeals Office hearing in advance of that                  

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011