Robert Gunselman - Page 10

                                       - 10 -                                         
               Petitioner has not alleged any irregularities with respect             
          to respondent’s assessment procedures, and the Forms 4340 provide           
          at least presumptive evidence that the taxes were validly                   
          assessed.  Nicklaus v. Commissioner, supra at 121.  The Forms               
          4340 herein contain all the information prescribed in section               
          301.6203-1, Proced. & Admin. Regs., including identification of             
          the taxpayer, the character of the liability assessed, the                  
          taxable period, and the amount of the assessment.  The Appeals              
          officer did not abuse his discretion in relying on the Forms 4340           
          to verify the validity of the assessments.  Roberts v.                      
          Commissioner, 118 T.C. 365, 371 n.10 (2002); Davis v.                       
          Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 40 (2000).10                                     
               The Forms 4340 show that respondent issued to petitioner               
          notices of balance due for the 1997, 1998, and 1999 tax                     
          liabilities on September 18, 2000, June 7, 1999, and June 5,                
          2000, respectively.  The notices of balance due constitute a                

               10Petitioner contends, however, that the Commissioner does             
          not have authority to determine deficiencies in amounts exceeding           
          those amounts which were reported on a taxpayer’s income tax                
          returns.  Presumably, petitioner is relying on the amended                  
          returns which he filed and on which he reported no taxes owing.             
          It is clear that the assessments were based on the taxes                    
          petitioner reported on his original returns.  See sec.                      
          6211(a)(1)(A).  Those assessments were valid, and the subsequent            
          filing of amended returns does not result in those assessments’             
          being invalid.  We also reject as frivolous petitioner’s argument           
          that he was not required to file a petition with the Tax Court in           
          order to avoid the assessment of the deficiency determined in the           
          notice of deficiency for 1997.  See sec. 6213(c).                           

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011