- 15 - ate on the civil penalty assessment. No collection alternatives could be discussed as the taxpayer is not in filing compliance and the taxpayer only continued to raise frivolous arguments. Given the taxpayer’s history of non-compliance, I believe that collection action in the form of levy should be allowed to proceed. Lacking the taxpayer’s cooperation, the proposed collection action balances the need for efficient collection of taxes with the taxpayer’s legitimate concern that any collection action be 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.4 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 regard- ing the questions raised in respondent’s motion. With respect to petitioner’s taxable year 1998, petitioner received a notice of deficiency, but she did not file a petition with respect to that notice. On the instant record, we find that petitioner may not challenge the existence or the amount of 4The only questions raised in respondent’s motion relate to petitioner’s unpaid liability for 1998 over which we have juris- diction and do not relate to the frivolous return penalty regard- ing her 1998 return over which we do not have jurisdiction. In this connection, on Feb. 6, 2003, the Court issued an Order granting respondent’s motion to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction insofar as petitioner sought review of either the notice of determination with respect to the frivolous return penalty regarding petitioner’s 1998 return or the decision letter with respect to the frivolous return penalty regarding peti- tioner’s 1998 return.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011