- 6 -
collection issues such as spousal defenses, the appropriateness
of the Commissioner’s intended collection action, and possible
alternative means of collection. Section 6330(c)(2)(B) provides
that the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability may
be contested at an Appeals Office hearing if the taxpayer did not
receive a notice of deficiency for the taxes in question or did
not otherwise have an earlier opportunity to dispute such tax
liability. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 609 (2000); Goza
v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 180-181 (2000). Section 6330(d)
provides for judicial review of the administrative determination
in the Tax Court or a United States District Court.
We find that petitioner did not raise any reviewable
collection issue at his Appeals Office hearing. Petitioner did
not contest the existence or amount of the underlying tax
liability. Petitioner failed to raise a spousal defense, make a
valid challenge to the appropriateness of respondent’s intended
collection action, or offer alternative means of collection.
These issues are now deemed conceded. Rule 331(b)(4).
Petitioner alleges that his wage levy deductions may have
been embezzled. This is based on mere assertions by petitioner,
in a written representation by his representative, Mr. Sheffield,
and in a letter from Mr. Jones, the former president of PWJ. No
evidence was introduced that BSA actually embezzled the wage levy
deductions. On this record, petitioner failed to prove that the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011