- 2 -
1991, 1992, 1994, 1995, and 1997 tax years.1 On October 12,
2005, we filed the initial opinion in this case, Drake v.
Commissioner, 125 T.C. 201 (Drake I). In Drake I, we concluded
that a memorandum received by the settlement officer assigned to
conduct petitioner’s administrative hearing under section 6330
(section 6330 hearing) constituted a prohibited ex parte
communication which may have damaged petitioner’s credibility
before respondent’s Appeals Office. Consequently, we held that
respondent’s Appeals officer abused his discretion in determining
that the proposed levy against petitioner should be sustained.
We retained jurisdiction of the case and remanded it to
respondent’s Appeals Office for a new section 6330 hearing with
an independent Appeals officer who had received no communication
relating to the credibility of petitioner or petitioner’s
representative. On November 17, 2005, petitioner filed a motion
for litigation costs and fees pursuant to section 7430 and Rule
231. In accordance with an order of this Court, a newly assigned
Appeals officer conducted a new section 6330 hearing with
petitioner (the section 6330 hearing on remand). On March 13,
2006, respondent’s Appeals Office issued a notice of
determination, sustaining the proposed collection action against
1Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code, as amended, and all Rule references
are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
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