- 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