- 16 -
Petitioner has not alleged any irregularity in the
assessment procedure that would raise a question about the
validity of the assessments or the information contained in the
Forms 4340. Moreover, petitioner has failed to raise a spousal
defense, make a valid challenge to the appropriateness of
respondent's intended collection action, or offer alternative
means of collection. These issues are now deemed conceded. Rule
331(b)(4).
The record reflects that the Appeals Office properly
verified that all applicable laws and administrative procedures
governing the assessment and collection of petitioner’s unpaid
tax liabilities were met. Accordingly, we hold that the Appeals
Office did not abuse its discretion in determining to proceed
with collection against petitioner.
B. Levy Upon Appeal
We turn now to respondent’s Motion to Permit Levy. As
recently discussed in Burke v. Commissioner, 124 T.C. __, __
(2005) (slip op. at 11-13), section 6330(e)(1) sets forth the
general rule that respondent may not proceed with collection by
levy if an administrative hearing is timely requested under
section 6330(a)(3)(B) and while any appeals from such
administrative hearing are pending. Section 6330(e)(2) provides
an exception to the suspension of the levy imposed under
subsection (e)(1) if the person’s underlying tax liability is not
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