- 12 -
purposes of section 6330(b). [Sec. 301.6330-1(d)(2),
Q&A-D6 and D7, Proced. & Admin. Regs.]
This Court has cited the above regulatory provisions, and
corresponding promulgations under section 6320, with approval.
See, e.g., Taylor v. Commissioner, supra; Leineweber v.
Commissioner, supra; Dorra v. Commissioner, supra; Gougler v.
Commissioner, supra.
With respect to the instant matter, the record reflects that
petitioner was not afforded an opportunity for a face-to-face
hearing when all of the issues he raised were deemed frivolous or
groundless. He had, however, stated an intent to record the
collection hearing he requested in his Form 12153. In Keene v.
Commissioner, 121 T.C. 8, 19 (2003), this Court held that
taxpayers are entitled, pursuant to section 7521(a)(1), to audio
record a face-to-face section 6330 hearing. The taxpayer in that
case had refused to proceed when denied the opportunity to
record, and we remanded the case to allow a recorded Appeals
hearing. Id.
In contrast, we have distinguished, and declined to remand,
cases where the taxpayer had participated in an Appeals Office
hearing, albeit unrecorded, and where all issues raised by the
taxpayer could be properly decided from the existing record.
E.g., id. at 19-20; Frey v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-87;
Durrenberger v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-44; Brashear v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-196; Kemper v. Commissioner, T.C.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011