- 6 -
and that a notice and demand for payment had been made. The
Appeals officer reviewed petitioner’s joint returns for the
relevant years, the notice of deficiency for 1997, the Forms
12153 that petitioner had filed, the administrative files for the
years 1995 through 1999, the case history, and a 14-page fax
transmittal from petitioner. The Appeals officer determined that
all applicable laws and administrative procedures had been met.
On March 12, 2002, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Office of
Appeals issued a notice of determination sustaining the lien
filings6 and the proposed levy action.
Petitioner filed a petition on April 3, 2002, in which he
alleges:
a) At the CDP hearing the appeals officer provided
no proof that the notice sent to the plaintiff
notifying him of his right to a CDP hearing was sent by
anyone delegated by the Secretary to do so (as required
by 6330(a)(1)[)], and it is the plaintiff’s contention
that no such delegation of authority exists.
b) At the hearing the appeals officer violated the
law by not “presenting” plaintiff with the
“verification from the secretary” as required by the
Code Sections 6330(c)(1) and 6330(c)(3)(A), and it is
the plaintiff’s contention that no such “verification
exists.”
c) No statutory Notice and Demand for payment was
ever sent to plaintiff in connection with the taxes and
or penalty at issue in accordance with the provisions
6The notice of determination released the lien filing with
respect to the 1995 and 1996 tax liabilities since those taxes
were paid in full. The notice determined that the lien filing
with respect to the 1997, 1998, and 1999 tax liabilities should
be maintained.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011