- 5 - Please be advised the courts have consistently and repeatedly rejected the arguments expressed in your letters and in many cases have imposed sanctions. In Pierson v. Commissioner [Dec. 54, 152], * * * [115 T.C. 576 (2000)], the Court issued fair warning of penalties under section 6673 to all those taxpayers who, in the future, institute or maintain a lien or levy action primarily for delay or whose position in such a pro- ceeding is frivolous or groundless and has in fact imposed a penalty in a number of such cases. (Please see enclosed Exhibit A) [list of cases showing imposi- tion of section 6673] Pursuant to Sections 6320 and 6330 of the Internal Revenue Code, Section 6320(c) discusses matters consid- ered at the hearing. Section 6330(c)(2)(B) precludes any challenge to the underlying liability, at the hearing, for any period, if the person received a statutory notice of deficiency or otherwise had an opportunity to dispute the liabilities. The Appeals officer enclosed with the Appeals officer’s January 5, 2004 letter a copy of a TXMODA transcript with respect to petitioner’s taxable year 1999. On February 4, 2004, petitioner sent a letter (petitioner’s February 4, 2004 letter) to respondent’s Appeals Office, which stated in pertinent part: In my numerous responses to the IRS I have re- quested to have a hearing, as provided for in proce- dures and Regulations (601.105(b)(1) thru 601.105(d)(2)(i)) but as of yet I have been offered none. Now for exact purpose that the ‘Restructuring and Reform Act of 1998' was enacted into law, I am again being denied. A hearing as called for in IRC Sec 6330(b)(1) “if the person requests a hearing under subsection (a)(3)(B), such hearing shall be held by the Internal Revenue Service Office of Appeals.”. Further more in the US District Court Case of ‘MESA OIL, INC., Plain- tiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant. Civil Action No. 00-B-851', Nov. 21, 2000 wherein I quotePage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011