- 4 -
Aguiar (1) That Mr. Gellner did not have the authority to
represent petitioner with regard to tax matters; (2) that Mr.
Jones was appointed as petitioner’s attorney-in-fact for the
years in issue; and (3) that, although petitioner did not want to
withdraw his rights to a section 6330 hearing, the bankruptcy
automatic stay barred further administrative proceedings at that
time.
On May 25, 2004, respondent’s Office of Appeals issued to
petitioner separate Notices of Determination Concerning
Collection Actions for the taxable years 1985 to 1995 and for the
taxable years 1996 to 1999. The notices stated that respondent
determined that it was appropriate to proceed with the proposed
levies. On June 28, 2004, petitioner filed with the Court
petitions for lien or levy action challenging respondent’s
notices.3 At the time the petitions were filed, petitioner
resided in Las Vegas, Nevada.
On August 19, 2004, respondent filed motions to dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction on the ground the petitions were filed in
violation of the automatic stay. On September 16, 2004,
petitioner filed objections to respondent’s motions. Petitioner
maintains that the Court should (1) conclude that petitioner
3The petitions arrived at the Court in an envelope bearing a
timely U.S. Postal Service postmark dated June 24, 2004. See
sec. 7502(a).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011