- 4 -
began collection activity. * * * The date of the collection
activity on your account, after the enactment of IRC Section 6015
was May 3, 1999.” On January 29, 2004, respondent mailed to
petitioner a preliminary determination proposing to deny
petitioner’s request for innocent spouse relief under section
6015(b), (c), and (f) for 1992 for the reason the request was
received “more than two years after the date * * * [the Internal
Revenue Service] began collection activity. * * * The date of
the first collection activity on your account, after the
enactment of IRC section 6015 was January 22, 2001.”3
Petitioner filed an amended petition with this Court for
1991, 1992, and 1993 on January 5, 2004, appealing respondent’s
determinations. The sole issue for decision is whether denial of
relief for 1991, 1992, and 1993 was an abuse of respondent’s
discretion.
Where the underlying tax liability is not at issue, as in
this case, the Court reviews the determination regarding
collection actions on the basis of whether there was an abuse of
discretion by respondent. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604,
610 (2000). An abuse of discretion is defined as any action that
3Though the preliminary notice for 1992 and 1993 stated that
the first collection activity on that account was Jan. 22, 2001,
as opposed to Dec. 13, 2000, this discrepancy is insignificant to
the issue because May 21, 2003, is still more than 2 years after
Jan. 21, 2001. Respondent contends that Dec. 13, 2001, the date
the collection notices were sent, is the date of the first
collection activity on each of the accounts.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011