- 19 -
2000, or that it was their last known address. Second,
petitioners contend that their housekeeper did not speak English,
had no authority to accept any letters or paperwork for
petitioners, and did not give any of the notices to petitioners.
We need not linger long over this latter contention, however, for
as previously discussed, the Appeals officer verified (and
petitioners have not refuted) that the notices were also mailed
to petitioners, by both regular and certified mail, on the same
date. Petitioners have failed to refute the Appeals officer’s
verification that respondent made notice and demand for payment
of petitioners’ tax liabilities as required by section 6331(a).6
IV. Notice of Intent To Levy
On brief, petitioners argue that they were not given proper
notice of intent to levy under section 6331(d). Section
6331(d)(1) and (2) provides that at least 30 days before taking
levy action, the Commissioner must provide the taxpayer with a
written notice of intent to levy. The notice requirement of
section 6331(d), however, does not apply to a levy if the
Commissioner has made a finding that collection of tax is in
6 At trial, respondent introduced into evidence Forms 3552,
Notice of Tax Due on Federal Tax Return, dated June 1, 2000 (the
same date the jeopardy levy was made), that are addressed to P.O.
Box 1405, Rancho Mirage, California 92270. Petitioners do not
deny receiving these notices. Inasmuch as we have upheld the
Appeals officer’s verification that respondent made proper notice
and demand on May 2, 2000, we need not and do not decide whether
these Forms 3552 satisfied the sec. 6331(a) notice and demand
requirements for the jeopardy levy.
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011