Benjamin B. and Carolyn M. Haines - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          petitioners.  On April 3, 2001, a face-to-face hearing was held             
          with two Appeals officers and petitioners.  During the hearing,             
          petitioners were provided with a Form 4340, Certificate of                  
          Assessments and Payment, for their 1998 tax year.                           
               At the hearing, which was recorded and transcribed,                    
          petitioners asked the Appeals officers whether they had obtained            
          verification from the Secretary of the Treasury that the                    
          requirements of the applicable laws and procedures had been met.            
          The Appeals officers explained that the requested information was           
          on the Form 4340 provided to petitioners.  The Appeals officers             
          also provided petitioners with audit documents reflecting the               
          details underlying the deficiency determination and assessment              
          for 1998.  Petitioners then engaged the Appeals officers in a               
          discussion of the assessment and the information contained on               
          Form 4340.  Petitioners’ comments during that discussion focused            
          on whether the Commissioner could assess tax if taxpayers did not           
          consent or report the amounts in their returns.  Petitioners also           
          questioned the validity of the various notifications they                   
          received on the grounds that they were not signed by the                    
          Secretary or by some person who it was shown was authorized to do           
          so.  They also made the argument that respondent was required to            
          use certain forms and that respondent’s failure to do so rendered           
          notifications to them without effect.  Finally, petitioners                 
          questioned whether the Appeals officers could “point to” anything           






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

Last modified: May 25, 2011