- 6 -
same day as Keene, we held that it was not necessary to remand
the taxpayers’ case to the Appeals Office for a second hearing
even though the taxpayers were not permitted to record their
hearing. The Court found that all the taxpayers’ arguments,
other than their section 7521 argument, were frivolous or
groundless arguments that the Court had previously rejected. The
Court found that a new hearing was unnecessary because the
pleadings were sufficient to enable the Court to address all of
the non-section 7521 issues raised by the taxpayers. In Keene,
the Court distinguished Kemper by making it clear that its remand
of the Keene case to the Appeals Office was the result of the
pleadings’ being limited to the section 7521 issue, the
Commissioner’s acknowledgment that remand would be the proper
remedy if the taxpayer prevailed, and the fact that the taxpayer
had not received an Appeals Office hearing before trial. Keene
v. Commissioner, supra at 19-20.
Aside from petitioner’s assertion that he should have been
allowed to audio record his hearing, petitioner has raised only
contentions, arguments, and questions that this Court has
previously found to be frivolous and/or groundless. Unlike the
taxpayers in Keene, petitioner did receive a hearing, and the
Appeals officer’s notes of that hearing are a part of the record.
At trial the Court provided petitioner an opportunity to raise
any relevant issues that he might have raised at the hearing,
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011