- 5 -
Dellosso of the Hempstead Appeals Office sent petitioner a letter
describing, on the basis of the case history, the expected scope
of the hearing and what petitioner would be required to show in
order to avoid the proposed collection action. Petitioner
replied by letter; she stated that she was “disturbed by the way
you have continued to be abusive to us taxpayers in the tone and
content of your letter.” She also stated that it was clear from
the letter that “you are working with Mr. Breitberg and you are
going to be unfair, partial, and abusive in dealing with our
case.” Respondent refused to further reassign petitioner’s case.
Notice of Determination
Respondent issued a notice of determination to petitioner,
finding that she had failed to raise a relevant issue under
section 6330 and had failed to offer an acceptable alternative to
the proposed collection action.
Discussion
Section 6330
Section 6330 generally provides that the Commissioner cannot
proceed with collection by way of a levy until the taxpayer has
been given notice and the opportunity for an administrative
review of the matter (in the form of an Appeals Office hearing),
and that, if dissatisfied, the taxpayer may obtain judicial
review of the administrative determination. See Davis v.
Commissioner, 115 T.C. 35, 37 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114
T.C. 176, 179 (2000). The taxpayer requesting the hearing may
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011