- 12 - trustworthiness. We are unpersuaded by petitioner’s arguments in this regard.4 We conclude that the various transcripts and other materials in the administrative file, as well as the District Court’s opinion in McIntosh v. United States, 82 AFTR 2d 89-6501 (S.D. Ohio 1998), and the various Forms 4340 in evidence establish that respondent properly assessed petitioner’s 1990 tax liability. Petitioner has not shown any irregularity in respondent’s assessment procedures that raises a question about the validity of the 1990 assessment. In contesting the Appeals Office determination that the legal and procedural requirements for 1990 have been met, the only specific issues that petitioner has raised in this proceeding relate to his contentions that notice and demand was not sent to his last known address and that his 1990 tax liability has previously been extinguished. As discussed in 4 For example, petitioner contends that, contrary to information contained in the Forms 4340, notice and demand was not timely sent to his last known address–-a contention that we address and reject in Sec. C of this opinion. As another example, petitioner notes that his most recently received Form 4340, dated Oct. 4, 2002, fails to list the final notice of intent to levy that he received in late September 1993. There is nothing to suggest, however, that the issuance of a final notice of intent to levy is an event that the Commissioner always records in a Form 4340. Cf. Keene v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-277 (omission of issuance of notice of deficiency from a Form 4340 did not render the Form 4340 suspect). In any event, the final notice of intent to levy is part of the administrative file that the Appeals officer relied upon in making his determination.Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011