Kevin Thompson - Page 6

                                        - 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