Craig H. Bond and Jennifer Bond - Page 6




                                        - 6 -                                         
          of a statutory notice for purposes of section 6330(c)(2)(B) means           
          receipt in time to petition the Tax Court for a redetermination             
          of the deficiency asserted in the notice of deficiency.  Sec.               
          301.6320-1(e)(3), Q&A-E2, Proced. & Admin. Regs.                            
               Following a hearing, the Appeals Office must make a                    
          determination whether the Secretary may proceed with the proposed           
          collection action.  In so doing, the Appeals Office is required             
          to take into consideration:  (1) The verification presented by              
          the Secretary that the requirements of applicable law and                   
          administrative procedures have been met, (2) the relevant issues            
          raised by the taxpayer, and (3) whether the proposed collection             
          action appropriately balances the need for efficient collection             
          of taxes with a taxpayer’s concerns regarding the intrusiveness             
          of the proposed collection action.  Sec. 6330(c)(3).                        
               Section 6330(d)(1) grants the Court jurisdiction to review             
          the determination made by the Appeals officer.  If the underlying           
          tax liability is properly at issue, the Court reviews the                   
          determination regarding the underlying tax liability de novo.               
          Sego v. Commissioner, supra at 610.  The Court reviews all other            
          determinations for abuse of discretion.  Lunsford v.                        
          Commissioner, 117 T.C. 183, 185 (2001); Sego v. Commissioner,               
          supra at 610; Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 182 (2000).               
               Petitioners claim that they are not precluded from                     
          contesting their underlying tax liability for 2001 because Mr.              







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007