- 4 - final notice of intent to levy or the notice of Federal lien filing that were subject to consideration in a hearing, and because the underlying liability was not subject to consideration in this hearing under section 6330(c)(2)(B). Petitioners filed with the Court a petition for lien or levy action under section 6320(c) or 6330(d). At the time the petition was filed, petitioners resided in Fresno, California. Their petition is replete with tax protester type arguments. Respondent filed a motion for summary judgment. Respondent contends that petitioners’ challenge to the existence and/or amount of their tax liabilities for 1996 and 1997 is not properly before the Court in this proceeding, and that petitioners otherwise failed to raise a valid issue for judicial review. Petitioners filed a response in opposition to respondent’s motion, which is also replete with tax protester type arguments. Petitioners maintain that the burden is on respondent to prove the assessments resulting from the notice of deficiency are valid. Petitioners filed a statement which has as its core thesis that this case should be: dismissed for lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction on the grounds that the Notice of Determination issued by respondent was issued on hearsay facts and evidence. Petitioner demands that respondent provide certified facts or evidence of a statutory correct assessment or tax liability to support any claimed deficiency. Lacking a statutory correct assessment or tax liability the notice of determination is null and void and this court does not have Subject Matter Jurisdiction.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011