- 14 -
to audio record section 6330 hearings. The taxpayer in that case
had refused to proceed when denied the opportunity to record, and
we remanded the case to allow a recorded Appeals hearing. Id.
In contrast, we have distinguished, and declined to remand,
cases where the taxpayer had participated in an Appeals Office
hearing, albeit unrecorded, and where all issues raised by the
taxpayer could be properly decided from the existing record.
E.g., id. at 19-20; Frey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-87;
Durrenberger v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-44; Brashear v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-196; Kemper v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2003-195. Stated otherwise, cases will not be remanded to
Appeals, nor determinations otherwise invalidated, merely on
account of the lack of a recording when to do so is not necessary
and would not be productive. See, e.g., Frey v. Commissioner,
supra; Durrenberger v. Commissioner, supra; Brashear v.
Commissioner, supra; Kemper v. Commissioner, supra; see also
Lunsford v. Commissioner, 117 T.C. 183, 189 (2001). A principal
scenario falling short of the necessary or productive standard
exists where the taxpayers rely on frivolous or groundless
arguments consistently rejected by this and other courts. See,
e.g., Frey v. Commissioner, supra; Brashear v. Commissioner,
supra; Kemper v. Commissioner, supra.
Because no hearing had been conducted at all in petitioner’s
case and the record contained certain factual ambiguities, we
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011