- 12 -
were not raised at the conference they had with Appeals Officer
Powell on September 18, 2002, but deny that they had a collection
due process hearing because they were not allowed to challenge
the underlying liabilities. Finally, petitioners argue that
there is an offer in compromise pending with respect to those
liabilities.
III. Discussion
A. Material Issues of Fact
There is no dispute with respect to the bankruptcy files and
the hearing files. Those files establish most of the facts
material to this case. Because petitioners argue that, although
they received the notices, they did not receive them in time to
petition the Tax Court, respondent does not rely on receipt of
the notices as the reason petitioners were precluded at their
conference with Appeals Officer Powell from raising challenges to
their liabilities for the unpaid assessments. Rather, respondent
relies on the opportunity presented to petitioners by the
bankruptcy case to dispute those liabilities. Since the relevant
facts with respect to the bankruptcy case are not in dispute, we
are faced with the question of whether, as a matter of law, the
bankruptcy case presented petitioners the opportunity to dispute
the underlying liabilities. We need make no finding as to when
petitioners received the notices.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011