-12-
that the notice of deficiency issued to him was invalid because,
he asserts, it was not signed by the Secretary or somebody
delegated by the Secretary. We consider this argument frivolous.
The notice of deficiency was signed by the Director of an
Internal Revenue Service Center. The Secretary or his delegate
is authorized by statute to issue notices of deficiency, secs.
6212(a), 7701(a)(11)(B) and (12)(A)(i), and it is well
established that the Director of an Internal Revenue Service
Center is an authorized delegate, e.g., Hughes v. United States,
953 F.2d 531, 536 (9th Cir. 1992); Nestor v. Commissioner, 118
T.C. 162 (2002); Weishan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-88.
Petitioner argues that the Appeals officer failed to obtain
verification from the Secretary that the requirements of all
applicable laws and administrative procedures were met as
required by section 6330(c)(1). We disagree. First, section
6330(c)(1) does not require the Commissioner to rely upon a
particular document (e.g., the summary record itself rather than
transcripts of account) to satisfy this verification requirement.
Kuglin v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-51; see also Weishan v.
Commissioner, supra. Second, the Appeals officer is not required
to give the taxpayer a copy of the verification that the
requirements of any applicable law or administrative procedure
have been met. Sec. 6330(c)(1); sec. 301.6330-1(e)(1), Proced. &
Admin. Regs.; see also Nestor v. Commissioner, supra. More
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011