Paul Everman - Page 13

                                       - 13 -                                         
          GS-9 and above revenue officers and (in the case of levies on               
          property in the hands of third parties) GS-9 and above revenue              
          officers.  See Delegation Order No. 191 (Rev. 2; Oct. 1, 1999)              
          (Rev. 3; June 11, 2001), pertaining to levies; Delegation Order             
          No. 196 (Rev. 4; Oct. 4, 2000), pertaining to liens.  Consistent            
          with these delegations of authority, the Notice of Federal Tax              
          Lien and the notice required by section 6320, which were                    
          initiated by Revenue Officer John Stetsko and authorized by                 
          Acting Technical Support Group Manager Brenda McCullough, and the           
          final notice of intent to levy, which was issued by Revenue                 
          Officer Stetsko, are valid.  Finally, in connection with the                
          foregoing, we observe that there is no statutory requirement that           
          a final notice of intent to levy be signed.  Cf. Pendola v.                 
          Commissioner, 50 T.C. 509, 513-514 (1968) (a notice of deficiency           
          need not be signed in order to be valid); Fox v. Commissioner,              
          T.C. Memo. 1993-277 n.4 (same), affd. without published opinion             
          69 F.3d 543 (9th Cir. 1995); Elmore v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.             
          2003-123 (same for notice of determination to proceed with levy).           
               Consistent with the preceding discussion, we conclude that             
          we lack jurisdiction in this case for the reasons set forth in              
          respondent’s motion to dismiss, as supplemented.                            











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

Last modified: May 25, 2011