- 4 -
On August 30, 2001, petitioner, while residing in Palm
Harbor, Florida, filed his petition for review of the
determination.
OPINION
Section 6330(c)(2)(B) allows challenges to the existence or
amount of the underlying liability if petitioner did not receive
a notice of deficiency or have an opportunity to dispute the
liability. Where the validity of the underlying liability is
properly at issue, the Court will review the matter de novo.
Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 39 (2000). In cases where
the validity of the liability is not properly part of the appeal,
the Court reviews the Commissioner's administrative determination
for abuse of discretion. See id.; see also Goza v. Commissioner,
114 T.C. 176, 182-183 (2000). Because petitioner does not
challenge the validity of the underlying tax liability in his
petition, we review respondent’s determination for abuse of
discretion.
Petitioner contends that respondent failed to obtain
verification from the Secretary that the requirements of all
applicable laws and administrative procedures had been met
pursuant to section 6330(c)(1). We disagree. Both the
assessment of taxes and the recordation of the lien at issue were
carried out in accordance with all appropriate statutes and
regulations, as verified in the notice of determination. Sec.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011