Gloria Pomerantz - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
          issue relating to the unpaid tax, including appropriate spousal             
          defenses, challenges to the appropriateness of collection                   
          actions, and offers of collection alternatives.  Section                    
          6330(c)(2)(B) provides that the person may also raise at the                
          hearing challenges to the existence or amount of the underlying             
          tax liability if the person did not receive a statutory notice of           
          deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an              
          opportunity to dispute such tax liability.                                  
               Section 6330(d) provides for judicial review of the                    
          administrative determination in the Tax Court or a Federal                  
          District Court, as may be appropriate.                                      
               Petitioner asserts that the Appeals Office erred in denying            
          her an opportunity to challenge her underlying liabilities for              
          1995 and 1996 because (1) she did not receive a notice of                   
          deficiency for those years, and (2) she was never given a full              
          and fair opportunity to contest her liability for additions to              
          tax for fraud for those years.  We disagree.                                
               As previously discussed, section 6330(c)(2)(B) provides that           
          the person may raise at the hearing challenges to the existence             
          or amount of the underlying tax liability if the person did not             
          receive a statutory notice of deficiency for such tax liability             
          or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute such tax                
          liability.  The record in this case reflects that, although                 
          petitioner did not receive a statutory notice of deficiency for             
          1995 and 1996, she did in fact have a prior opportunity to                  




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011