- 10 -
administrative hearing (the recording issue). In response to
petitioner's Declaration, counsel for respondent asserted that
petitioner failed to inform the Appeals Office in advance of the
administrative hearing that he intended to make an audio
recording7 and that petitioner failed to raise the recording
issue in his petition.
Petitioner countered that the Court's holding in Keene v.
Commissioner, 121 T.C. 8, 19-20 (2003), controls with regard to
the recording issue and the matter should be remanded to the
Appeals Office for further proceedings. Petitioner also asserted
that the Court should reject respondent's argument that
petitioner's tax liabilities were not discharged by the
bankruptcy court on the ground that respondent failed to prove
that petitioner did not file tax returns for the years in issue.
At the close of the hearing, the Court took the motion under
advisement and indicated to the parties that if the motion for
summary judgment were not granted the case would be rescheduled
for a later trial.
Following the hearing, on March 10, 2005, respondent filed
with the Court a motion to permit levy pursuant to section
6330(e)(2).
7 See sec. 7521(a), which provides that an officer or
employee of the Internal Revenue Service “shall, upon advance
request of such taxpayer, allow the taxpayer to make an audio
recording of * * * [an in-person] interview at the taxpayer’s own
expense and with the taxpayer’s own equipment.”
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011