- 13 -
review determination is appealed under section 6330(d); i.e, the
Tax Court or Federal District Court. Consistent with the
foregoing, the Tax Court has jurisdiction to entertain
respondent’s Motion to Permit Levy.
As previously discussed, petitioner is barred under section
6330(c)(2)(B) from challenging the existence or amount of his
underlying tax liabilities for 1993 to 1997 in this proceeding.
See Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176 (2000). Accordingly, the
first element that respondent must establish to obtain relief
under section 6330(e)(2) is satisfied. The question that remains
is whether respondent has shown good cause why the levy should no
longer be suspended.
Section 6330 does not include a definition of the term “good
cause”. Giving due consideration to the public policies
underlying section 6330, we believe that respondent may show good
cause that a levy should not be suspended where, as here, the
taxpayer has used the collection review procedure to espouse
frivolous and groundless arguments and otherwise needlessly delay
collection.
Petitioner is no stranger to the Court. As outlined above,
he abused the Court’s procedures in the deficiency case at docket
No. 13410-00, and he has exploited the collection review
procedure primarily to delay collection. To permit any further
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011