- 22 -
In these circumstances, we conclude that any ex parte
contacts did not prejudice petitioner and should not give rise to
a remand for yet another hearing opportunity before a different
Appeals officer.
Bankruptcy Discharge
In his request for a hearing, petitioner claimed that the
liabilities at issue had been discharged in bankruptcy. The 2004
supplemental determination concluded that the liabilities had not
been discharged.
We have jurisdiction, when reviewing under section 6330(d) a
determination to proceed with a levy, to decide whether income
tax liabilities have been discharged in bankruptcy. Swanson v.
Commissioner, 121 T.C. 111, 116-117 (2003).
We are satisfied that the 2004 supplemental determination
correctly concluded that petitioner's 1990-93 and 1996
liabilities were not discharged as a result of his 1993
bankruptcy discharge. The 1990 and 1991 liabilities were not
dischargeable because they were from years for which returns were
due within 3 years before the August 2, 1993, filing of the
petition in bankruptcy. See 11 U.S.C. secs. 507(a)(8)(A)(i),
523(a)(1)(A) (2000); Durrenberger v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
2004-44. The 1992 liability was not dischargeable because
petitioner's 1992 return was filed on June 10, 1994, which was
after its extended due date (August 15, 1993), and after 2 years
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011