- 15 -
Petitioner has not alleged, and the record contains no
evidence, that respondent committed any erroneous or dilatory
acts requiring abatement of interest. Thus, the Court concludes
respondent's decision not to abate interest is not an abuse of
discretion.
Petitioner asserts he did not receive proper notice of the
filing of the NFTL with respect to his unpaid income tax
liabilities for the years at issue. Under section 6320 the
Secretary shall furnish the person described in section 6321 with
written notice of the filing of a notice of lien under section
6323. The notice may be sent by certified mail to the person’s
last known address not more than 5 business days after the day of
filing the Federal tax lien. Sec. 6320(a)(2). Petitioner was
duly sent notice within 5 business days of the filing of the
Federal tax lien. Thus, the Court concludes respondent did not
abuse his discretion in determining petitioner received proper
notice of the filing of the NFTL.
Finally, respondent did not abuse his discretion in
determining further consideration of collection alternatives was
futile. Petitioner repeatedly failed to cooperate and respond to
respondent’s requests for financial information or to submit a
processable offer-in-compromise.
Accordingly, the Court holds that respondent’s determination
upholding the Federal tax lien was not an abuse of his
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011