Juanita and Emmanuel Kendricks - Page 1

                                   124 T.C. No. 6                                     


                               UNITED STATES TAX COURT                                


                    JUANITA AND EMMANUEL KENDRICKS, Petitioners v.                    
                    COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent                      


               Docket No. 3430-03L.            Filed March 9, 2005.                   

                    At the conclusion of a collection due process                     
               hearing (hearing), R’s Appeals Office (Appeals)                        
               determined to proceed by levy to collect unpaid                        
               assessments of tax.  Ps ask us to review that                          
               determination.  Among other errors, Ps claim that                      
               Appeals erred in not allowing them to raise at the                     
               hearing the tax liabilities underlying the unpaid                      
               assessments because they had not had the opportunity to                
               dispute those liabilities in a bankruptcy proceeding                   
               instituted by them.                                                    
                    1.  Held:  The bankruptcy proceeding instituted by                
               petitioners afforded them the opportunity to dispute                   
               the underlying liabilities within the meaning of sec.                  
               6330(c)(2)(B), I.R.C., and, as a result, Ps were                       
               precluded from raising those liabilities during the                    
               hearing.                                                               
                    2.  Held, further, because Ps neither raised                      
               collection alternatives during the hearing nor properly                
               made an offer in compromise, Appeals did not err in                    





Page:   1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011