Michael E. Vierow - Page 8

                                        - 8 -                                         
          question about the validity of the assessments or the information           
          contained in the Forms 4340.  See Davis v. Commissioner, 115 T.C.           
          35, 41 (2000); Mann v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-48.                    
               Petitioner’s testimony, the notices of deficiency, the                 
          certified mail receipts, and the certified mail list establish              
          that respondent mailed the notices of deficiency via certified              
          mail to petitioner at his correct address.  The Forms 4340                  
          establish a proper assessment and that respondent sent petitioner           
          notice and demand for payment and notice of intent to levy.  A              
          certified mail return receipt for the hearing notice and the fact           
          that petitioner attached the hearing notice to his hearing                  
          request establish that petitioner received the hearing notice.              
          Accordingly, we hold that the Appeals officer satisfied the                 
          verification requirement of section 6330(c)(1).  Cf. Nicklaus v.            
          Commissioner, 117 T.C. 117, 120-121 (2001).                                 
               Petitioner has failed to raise a spousal defense, make a               
          valid challenge to the appropriateness of respondent’s intended             
          collection action, or offer alternative means of collection.                
          These issues are now deemed conceded.  See Rule 331(b)(4).                  














Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011