- 22 -
actual prejudice in order to obtain due process relief. Riland
v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 185, 197-198 (1982) (involving a claimed
denial of due process on account of delay in issuance of the
subject deficiency notice). The record in the instant case is
devoid of such prejudice. Although petitioner was made aware of
Section 530 at least prior to filing its petition with the Court,
petitioner failed therein to raise the statute. Petitioner then
did nothing to prepare this case for trial. Nonetheless, we have
addressed the merits of petitioner’s claim for relief under
Section 530(a), first put forth 3 months after trial, despite the
untimeliness of petitioner’s contentions. Accordingly,
petitioner was afforded an opportunity to be heard, and no actual
prejudice was sustained.
C. Conclusion
We hold that Ridge is an employee of petitioner pursuant to
section 3121(d)(1) and that petitioner is not entitled to relief
under Section 530. Accordingly, petitioner is liable for FICA
and FUTA taxes for the periods in issue as set forth in
respondent’s notice of determination and relevant stipulations.
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered for
respondent and in accordance with
stipulations as to amounts.
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Last modified: May 25, 2011