- 10 -
compromise, or determination that petitioner’s account is
currently not collectible) and asking for more details as to why
petitioner did not owe the amount stated in the notice of intent
to levy. Mr. Talbott also requested and reviewed the IRS
administrative file related to the default of the offer-in-
compromise. On January 24, 2001, Mr. Talbott looked at
petitioner’s transcript of account for 1998. Mr. Talbott’s case
activity record states: “Per research on IDRS, no record of 98
1040 being filed. * * * Per IRP information, TP had a filing
requirement, but may have been due a refund.” Mr. Talbott
concluded that petitioner had defaulted on the offer-in-
compromise.
On January 29, 2001, in a telephone section 6330 hearing
(the hearing), Mr. Coy stated to Mr. Talbott that he mailed
petitioner’s 1998 return on October 15, 1999. Specifically, Mr.
Coy told Mr. Talbott that he prepared petitioner’s return, took
the return to petitioner, obtained petitioner’s signature, and
mailed the return on October 15, 1999.
The only evidence Mr. Talbott would consider for proof of
mailing was a certified mail or registered mail receipt. Mr.
Talbott did not consider petitioner’s pattern of filing returns
on October 15, despite having looked at the transcripts for 1995,
1996, 1997, and 1999.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011