- 14 -
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-94; Yazzie v. Commissioner, T.C.
Memo. 2004-233, affd. 153 Fed. Appx. 456 (9th Cir. 2004); see
also United States v. Rodgers, 461 U.S. 677, 682-683 (1983).
Petitioner further claims, in opposition to summary
judgment, that he was not provided notice of his right to a
section 6330 hearing by the Secretary or his delegate, as
required by section 6330(a)(1). See also sec. 7701(a)(11)(B),
(12)(A)(i). This claim is also meritless, as the Secretary has
delegated the authority to issue notices of intent to levy to a
host of Internal Revenue Service employees. Delegation Order No.
191 (Rev. 3), effective June 11, 2001; see also Craig v.
Commissioner, supra at 263; Yazzie v. Commissioner, supra. We
note also that there is no requirement that a notice of intent to
levy be signed. Everman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-137.
Petitioner contends that his right to a hearing under
section 6330 was infringed as a result of the settlement
officer's decision to terminate the conference rather than allow
petitioner to record it. In Keene v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. 8
(2003), we held that section 7521(a)(1) entitles taxpayers to
audio record conferences held pursuant to sections 6320 and 6330.
However, in Kemper v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-195, issued
on the same day as Keene, and also involving a failure to accord
the taxpayer the opportunity to audio record his section 6330
conference, we held that, because the only arguments the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011