- 6 -
Discussion
Summary judgment may be granted only if it is demonstrated
that no genuine issue exists as to any material fact, and a
decision may be rendered as a matter of law. Rule 121(b);
Sundstrand Corp. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 518, 520 (1992), affd.
17 F.3d 965 (7th Cir. 1994). Because the underlying tax
liability is not in dispute, we review the Appeals officer’s
actions under an abuse of discretion standard. Goza v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000). Under the abuse of
discretion standard, a determination will be affirmed unless the
respondent took action that was arbitrary or capricious, lacks
sound basis in fact, or is not justifiable in light of the facts
and circumstances. Mailman v. Commissioner, 91 T.C. 1079, 1084
(1988).
Before a levy may be made on any property or right to
property, a taxpayer is entitled to notice of intent to levy and
notice of the right to a fair hearing before an impartial officer
of the IRS Appeals Office. Secs. 6330(a) and (b), 6331(d).
Taxpayers may raise challenges to “the appropriateness of
collection actions” and may make “offers of collection
alternatives, which may include the posting of a bond, the
substitution of other assets, an installment agreement, or an
offer-in-compromise”. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A). The Appeals officer
must consider those issues, verify that the requirements of
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011