- 6 -
appeals available to the person.
Under section 6330, the Commissioner cannot proceed with
collection by levy until the person has been given notice and the
opportunity for an administrative review of the matter (in the
form of an Appeals Office hearing) and, if dissatisfied, with
judicial review of the administrative determination. Davis v.
Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 37 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114
T.C. 176, 179 (2000). In the case of such judicial review, the
Court will review a taxpayer’s liability under the de novo
standard where the validity of the underlying tax liability is at
issue. A taxpayer’s underlying tax liability may be at issue if
he or she “did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for
such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to
dispute such tax liability.” Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B). The Court will
review the Commissioner’s administrative determination for abuse
of discretion with respect to all other issues. Sego v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000).
Here, petitioner does not dispute the existence or the
amount of an underlying tax liability. Therefore, the proper
standard for our review of respondent’s determination is abuse of
discretion. Under section 6330(c)(3), the determination of an
Appeals officer must take into consideration (A) the verification
that the requirements of applicable law and administrative
procedures have been met, (B) issues raised by the taxpayer, and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011