- 14 -
possible infirmities6 in the initial notice of determination is
unavailing in the circumstances of this case.
Challenges to Underlying Liabilities
With respect to the 1990-1993 liabilities, petitioner
claimed in his hearing request that the "numbers are completely
wrong". Respondent conceded prior to the March 1, 2004,
conference offered petitioner that petitioner was entitled to
dispute the underlying liabilities even though reported on
returns filed for those years.7 See Montgomery v. Commissioner,
122 T.C. at 1. In the absentee letter, petitioner contended that
he owed only a small fraction of the amounts respondent sought to
collect, but he offered no specific grounds of dispute. The 2004
supplemental determination considered both the returns and the
6 Since respondent sought a remand in order to offer
petitioner a hearing subsequent to the petition's filing, we
express no opinion whether sec. 6330 required respondent to do so
in this case, given petitioner's failure to respond to Appeals
Officer Ford's Sept. 13, 2001, letter offering a hearing. Cf.,
e.g., Taylor v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-25 (hearing
requirement satisfied where taxpayer fails to avail herself of
reasonable opportunity for hearing), affd. 130 Fed. Appx. 934
(9th Cir. 2005).
7 Petitioner also complains that he did not receive a notice
of deficiency with respect to these liabilities. However, as the
taxes were reported as due on petitioner's returns, no notice of
deficiency was necessary to assess them. See sec. 6201(a)(1).
Petitioner at various times claimed that he had not filed a
return for 1992. Respondent was initially unable to locate
petitioner's 1992 return, but eventually did so and provided a
copy to petitioner prior to the conference scheduled for Mar. 1,
2004. See supra note 4. We are satisfied on the basis of the
record that petitioner filed a return for 1992 in which he
reported as due the tax assessed by respondent.
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011