- 4 -
case. Although entitled “Petition for Review by Tax Court”,3
section 6015(e) gives jurisdiction to the Court “to determine the
appropriate relief available to the individual under this
section”. The right to petition is “In addition to any other
remedy provided by law” and is conditioned upon meeting the time
constraints prescribed in section 6015(e)(1)(A)(i) and (ii).
Even if the Commissioner fails to do anything for 6 months
following the filing of an election for relief (where there is
nothing to “review”), the individual may bring an action in this
Court. See sec. 6015(b), (e)(1)(A)(i)(II). A petition for a
decision as to whether relief is appropriate under section 6015
is generally4 not a “review” of the Commissioner’s determination
in a hearing but is instead an action begun in this Court. There
is in section 6015 no analog to section 6330 granting the Court
jurisdiction after a hearing at the Commissioner’s Appeals
Office.
Now that respondent’s motion to withdraw his motion for
summary judgment has been granted, the case will be returned to
3 Where statutory text is complicated and prolific, headings
and titles can do no more than indicate the provisions in a most
general manner. Bhd. of R.R. Trainmen v. Baltimore & O.R. Co.,
331 U.S. 519, 528-529 (1947).
4 We note that in our consideration of a request for relief
under sec. 6015(f), the standard for “review” is abuse of
discretion. See Hopkins v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. 73 (2003);
Cheshire v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 183, 197-198 (2000), affd. 282
F.3d 326 (5th Cir. 2002).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011