- 7 -
In its petition, petitioner broadly assigns as error,
“Incorrect Application of Procedures set forth in IRC Sections
6320 and 6330”. Petitioner has not, however, complied with Rule
331, which requires the petition to contain, among other things,
clear statements of the facts on which the petitioner bases the
assignment of error. Similarly, in its response to respondent’s
motion for summary judgment, petitioner has not set forth
specific facts, as required by Rule 121(d), showing that there is
a genuine issue for trial with respect to this generalized
allegation that respondent committed procedural error.
Petitioner’s failure to allege facts in support of this
assignment of error justifies summary judgment. See Poindexter
v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 280, 285-286 (2004).
Moreover, in the administrative proceeding, petitioner did
not ask for a collection alternative or raise any procedural
issues in its Form 12153 or otherwise bring any such issues to
the attention of the Appeals Office, other than attempting,
improperly, to contest its underlying tax liability. Such issues
generally are not properly raised for the first time before this
Court. Magana v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 488, 493 (2002). In any
event, we see no error in the Appeals Office determination.
In conclusion, we are satisfied that there is no genuine
issue as to any material fact and that a decision may be rendered
as a matter of law.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011