- 9 -
For office interview cases and correspondence examination
cases, an oral request is sufficient. Sec.
601.106(a)(1)(iii)(a), Statement of Procedural Rules. Since this
was an office interview case, petitioners were not required to
file a written request or a brief written statement of disputed
facts.
Whether Petitioners Orally Requested
an Appeals Office Conference
Petitioners contend that prior to the issuance of the
statutory notice, they orally requested an Appeals Office
conference, but TCO Harris never returned their calls. TCO
Harris, in turn, stated in his affidavit to the Court that, as of
October 20, 2004, the only contact that he received from
petitioners was a voice mail message on August 30, 2004. TCO
Harris also stated that he called petitioners and left them a
message requesting that they return his call, but petitioners did
not do so.
It is difficult to conclude that petitioners’ voice mail
message in August was an oral request for an Appeals Office
conference, because petitioners were not offered an opportunity
for administrative review with the Appeals Office until September
14, 2004, the date of the 30-day letter.
The burden is on petitioners to prove that they have
exhausted their available administrative remedies within the IRS.
Rule 232(e). Petitioners have not presented any evidence to show
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011