- 11 -
petitioner a notice of balance due on the date that respondent
assessed the tax and interest for 1997. A notice of balance due
constitutes a notice and demand for payment within the meaning of
section 6303(a). See, e.g., Hughes v. United States, 953 F.2d
531, 536 (9th Cir. 1992); Schaper v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2002-203; Weishan v. Commissioner, supra. The notice of balance
due was sufficient to constitute notice and demand within the
meaning of section 6303(a) because it informed petitioner of the
amount owed and requested payment. Standifird v. Commissioner,
supra; see Elias v. Connett, 908 F.2d 521, 525 (9th Cir. 1990)
(“The form on which a notice of assessment and demand for payment
is made is irrelevant as long as it provides the taxpayer with
all the information required under 26 U.S.C. section 6303(a).”)
Conclusion
Based upon our examination of the record before us, we find
that respondent did not abuse his discretion in determining to
proceed with the collection action as determined in the notice of
determination with respect to petitioner’s unpaid income tax
liability for taxable year 1997. In making that finding, we have
considered all arguments made by petitioner, and to the extent
not mentioned above, conclude them to be irrelevant or without
merit.
In respondent’s motion, respondent requests that the Court
impose against petitioner a penalty pursuant to section 6673 in
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011