- 5 - file and determined that all of the applicable requirements of law and administrative procedure had been met. Ms. Cahill was aware that petitioners had received a notice of deficiency for 1999 and ultimately that a decision for that year had been entered by the Court. On January 26, 2004, Ms. Cahill received from petitioners a copy of respondent’s January 13, 2004, letter with handwritten remarks by Mr. Whitinger. Specifically, Mr. Whitinger stated that petitioners had paid $363 which is “what the Court has ordered for taxable year 1999” and that petitioners “do not owe any more for taxable year 1999.” On January 30, 2004, Ms. Cahill held a telephone hearing with Mr. Whitinger. Mr. Whitinger asserted that the $363 payment made by petitioners was a full settlement of their 1999 liability. Specifically, Mr. Whitinger claimed that petitioners were informed by Mr. Sherrill that their $363 payment was in full satisfaction of their 1999 tax liability. Petitioners offered no substantiation other than Mr. Whitinger’s own statement to support their contention. During the telephone hearing, Ms. Cahill informed Mr. Whitinger that their $363 payment was for their 1999 deficiency and that the taxes reported as due on petitioners’ 1999 return remained unpaid. Ms. Cahill suggestedPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011