- 6 -
“Supplemental Motion for Sanctions, Contempt and For Other
Relief”.
Discussion
Our jurisdiction under section 6330 is generally limited to
reviewing whether a proposed levy action is proper.6 Respondent
has stated that the levy he proposed (and improperly made) is no
longer being pursued. The amounts that respondent collected by
levy have been returned with interest. In addition, amounts
previously collected regarding petitioner’s 1998 income tax
liability have been refunded or credited.7 Our jurisdiction
under section 6330 is limited to reviewing the proposed levy
action regarding petitioner’s 1998 income tax liability. Since
respondent now agrees that there is no unpaid 1998 income tax
liability upon which a levy could be based, we agree with
respondent that the issue regarding the levy is moot.
The gravamen of petitioner’s motion, as supplemented, is
that she “has been the victim of IRS tyranny, terrorism,
thievery, fraud, deceit, cunning craft and dishonesty.”
6Our jurisdiction is predicated upon sec. 6330(d)(1)(A).
See Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 37 (2000); Sego v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114
T.C. 176, 179 (2000).
7Petitioner appears to argue that she was entitled to funds
that respondent credited to other outstanding tax liabilities.
Sec. 6402(a) permits the Secretary to credit any overpayment
“against any liability in respect of an internal revenue tax on
the part of the person who made the overpayment” and requires the
Secretary to refund any balance to that taxpayer.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011