Robert Gunselman - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
               and requirements of Code Sections 6303, 6321, and 6331.                
               * * *                                                                  
                    d) No statute in the Internal Revenue Code                        
               establishes the “existence ...of the underlying (income                
               tax) liability” as referred to in 6330(c)(2)(B), and                   
               the United States will not be able to identify for this                
               Court any statute that establishes any such tax                        
               liability as for example Code sections 4401(c), 5005(a)                
               and 5703(a) impose liabilities to wagering, alcohol and                
               tobacco taxes.                                                         
                    e) L.G. Dowd who signed the Deficiency Notice at                  
               issue was never delegated by the Secretary to prepare                  
               and send out Deficiency Notices as required by 26                      
               USC6212, and the United States will not be able to                     
               supply this Court with any such Delegation of Authority                
               emanating from the Secretary.                                          
                    f) The United States will not be able to identify                 
               or produce a legislative regulation that would have                    
               required Petitioner to petition [the] Tax Court in                     
               order to avoid the assessment of the deficiency at                     
               issue.                                                                 
                    g) It is a fact that the United States will not be                
               able to identify for this Court any statute that allows                
               IRS employees to attribute to the petitioner an amount                 
               of tax greater than what petitioner showed on his 1997,                
               1998 and 1999 tax returns.                                             
                    h) At the CDP hearing the appeals officer produced                
               no delegation order from the Secretary and no                          
               enforcement “pocket commission” that would support the                 
               authority of those who signed the Notice of Lien at                    
               issue to do so, and petitioner contends that no such                   
               material documentation exists.                                         
          After reviewing the pleadings and the materials in the record, we           
          find that no genuine issue of material fact exists and that                 
          respondent’s determination should be sustained as a matter of               
          law.                                                                        








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

Last modified: May 25, 2011