- 9 -
applicable law or administrative procedure have been met. Sec.
6330(c)(1). However, section 6330(c)(1) does not require the
Commissioner to rely on a particular document to satisfy this
verification requirement. See Roberts v. Commissioner, 118 T.C.
365, 371 n.10 (2002), affd. 329 F.3d 1224 (11th Cir. 2003);
Weishan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-88, affd. 66 Fed. Appx.
113 (9th Cir. 2003); Lindsey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-87,
affd. 56 Fed. Appx. 802 (9th Cir. 2003); Tolotti v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 2002-86, affd. 70 Fed. Appx. 971 (9th Cir. 2003);
Duffield v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-53; Kuglin v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-51.
In this case the Appeals officer obtained and reviewed
transcripts of petitioner’s account. The transcripts contained
the information required by section 301.6203-1, Proced. & Admin.
Regs., such as the identification of the taxpayer, the character
of the liability assessed, the taxable period, if applicable, and
the amount of the assessment.
Petitioner has not alleged any irregularity in the
assessment procedure that would raise a question about the
validity of the assessment or the information contained in the
transcripts. See Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 41 (2000);
Mann v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-48. Accordingly, we
conclude the Appeals officer satisfied the verification
requirement of section 6330(c)(1). See Nicklaus v. Commissioner,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011