- 6 - of the hearing with Appeals or the consideration of collection alternatives. OPINION There is no disagreement about any material fact, and the controverted issue involves a question that is ripe for summary judgment. Rule 121(b); Fla. Peach Corp. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 678, 681 (1988); Shiosaki v. Commissioner, 61 T.C. 861, 862 (1974). Section 6330 provides that, upon request and in the circumstances described therein, a taxpayer has a right to a “fair hearing”. Sec. 6330(b). A “fair hearing” consists of the following elements: (1) An impartial officer will conduct the hearing; (2) the conducting officer will receive verification from the Secretary that the requirements of applicable law and administrative procedure have been met; (3) certain issues may be heard such as spousal defenses and offers-in-compromise; and (4) a challenge to the underlying liability may be raised if the taxpayer did not receive a statutory notice of deficiency or otherwise receive an opportunity to dispute such liability. Sec. 6330(c). Petitioner, in response to respondent’s motion for summary judgment, advances three principal contentions. Her first contention is that the 3-year period for assessment of the tax had expired prior to the time (August 1998) that respondentPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011