- 8 - his 1988 Federal income tax liability. See sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).4 Because we review de novo respondent’s determination with respect to the existence or amount of petitioner’s 1988 Federal income tax liability, see Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000), it is appropriate to consider and resolve those issues at this time in this proceeding. Remanding the case to respondent’s Appeals Office would, more likely than not, needlessly delay the collection of petitioner’s 1988 Federal income tax liability (plus related additions to tax and interest), which, if the proper amount has been assessed, is already long overdue. See Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 183, 189 (2001); Thomas v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-231; Moore v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-1. 4 Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B) states: (B) Underlying liability.--The person may also raise at the hearing challenges to the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability for any tax period if the person did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute such tax liability. Petitioner claims that he never received a notice of deficiency for 1988. Respondent’s records indicate that one was sent, but because respondent’s administrative file has been destroyed, respondent cannot refute petitioner’s contention and concedes that petitioner may challenge the existence or the amount of his 1988 Federal income tax liability in this proceeding.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011