- 6 - the tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute the tax liability. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B). Where the validity of the underlying tax liability is properly in issue, the Court will review the matter de novo. Where the validity of the underlying tax is not properly at issue, however, the Court will review the Commissioner’s administrative determination for abuse of discretion. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000). A taxpayer may challenge a self-assessed liability reported on his return where he has not had the opportunity to dispute the liability. Montgomery v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 1, 9 (2004). However, section 6330(c)(2) only allows the taxpayer to raise “any relevant issue relating to the unpaid tax or the proposed levy”, not “any” issue. Frivolous challenges to the underlying liability are not “relevant issues”. Hathaway v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-15. In the instant case, the record indicates that the only issues petitioner raised throughout the section 6330 administrative process, in his petition to this Court, and in his response to respondent’s motions for summary judgment, were frivolous tax protester type arguments. We do not address petitioner’s frivolous arguments with somber reasoning and copious citations of precedent, as to do so might suggest thatPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011