Robert & Polly A. Gatlos - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         
          v. Commissioner, supra at 610.  Where the underlying tax                    
          liability is properly at issue, the Court reviews any                       
          determination regarding the underlying tax liability de novo.               
          Id.                                                                         
               A hearing officer may rely on a computer transcript or Form            
          4340, Certificate of Assessments, Payments and Other Specified              
          Matters, to verify that a valid assessment was made and that a              
          notice and demand for payment was sent to the taxpayer in                   
          accordance with section 6303.  Nestor v. Commissioner, 118 T.C.             
          162, 166 (2002).  Absent a showing of irregularity, a transcript            
          that shows such information is sufficient to establish that the             
          procedural requirements of section 6330 have been met.  Id. at              
          166-167.                                                                    
               In this case, the undisputed facts set forth in respondent’s           
          motion, declarations in support of the motion, and attached                 
          exhibits establish that respondent has satisfied the requirements           
          of section 6330.  Appeals Officer Stanton, who had had no prior             
          involvement with respect to the unpaid tax liabilities before the           
          section 6330 hearing as required by section 6330(b)(3), verified            
          that proper assessments were made as reflected on computer                  
          transcripts attached to the motion for summary judgment and in              
          the notice of determination, and that the requisite notices had             
          been sent to the petitioners.  Appeals Officer Stanton also                 
          considered petitioners’ argument and rejected it as not relevant            






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011