- 6 -
receive a statutory notice of deficiency or otherwise receive an
opportunity to dispute the liability. Sec. 6330(c).
Petitioner and an impartial Appeals officer conducted an
administrative hearing comprising three separate telephone calls.
For purposes of the hearing, petitioner and respondent agreed to
place petitioner’s 1993 and 1994 tax years at issue. Because
this Court had previously entered a decision, the merits of
petitioner’s underlying tax liability were not at issue at the
administrative hearing and are not at issue here. Therefore, we
review respondent’s administrative determination to proceed with
collection for an abuse of discretion. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B); Sego
v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000). Because petitioner
was not entitled to question the underlying tax liability, his
administrative hearing was limited to collection issues,
including spousal defenses, the appropriateness of respondent’s
intended collection action, and collection alternatives.
Petitioner raises two issues with respect to the appropriateness
of respondent’s collection actions.2
Respondent assessed petitioner’s 1993 and 1994 tax
liabilities on December 12, 1999. On July 29, 2000, respondent
issued to petitioner a Final Notice-–Notice of Intent to Levy and
Notice of Your Right to a Hearing for his 1994 tax year. On
2 Petitioner does not challenge his underlying tax
liability, but rather challenges respondent’s ability to collect.
Petitioner contends that there was a waiver or some form of
estoppel connected with respondent’s waiver of respondent’s right
to respond to petitioner’s petition for writ of certiorari.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011