- 16 -
challenge his underlying liability under the rationale of
Montgomery v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 1, 9 (2004),5 he has at no
time offered even a scintilla of evidence that would show error
in respondent’s determinations. Since he did not address
computation of his 1998 tax liability either at trial or on
brief, even a de novo review would not avail petitioner.
Moreover, he has now forfeited his chance to suggest any
meritorious issues worthy of remand.
3. Review for Abuse of Discretion
Petitioner has also made various arguments relating to
aspects of the assessment and collection procedures that we
review for abuse of discretion. Action constitutes an abuse of
discretion under this standard where arbitrary, capricious, or
without sound basis in fact or law. Woodral v. Commissioner, 112
T.C. 19, 23 (1999).
Federal tax assessments are formally recorded on a record of
assessment in accordance with section 6203. The Commissioner is
not required to use Form 23C in making an assessment. Roberts v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. at 369-371. Furthermore, section
6330(c)(1) mandates neither that the Appeals officer rely on a
particular document in satisfying the verification requirement
nor that the Appeals officer actually give the taxpayer a copy of
the verification upon which he or she relied. Craig v.
5 Cf. Farley v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-168.
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011