- 13 -
Even if the Court were to decline to consider the 2001
notice of deficiency and the 2002 notice of deficiency attached
as exhibits to respondent’s motion, the declaration that was
signed by the settlement officer (settlement officer’s declara-
tion) and that was attached to that motion establishes that the
settlement officer considered whether a notice of deficiency was
issued to petitioner with respect to each of his taxable years
2001 and 2002 and determined that such a notice was issued for
each such year. The settlement officer’s declaration states in
pertinent part:
I verified through review of the Internal Revenue
Service’s administrative file and IDRS [integrated data
retrieval system] information, including transcripts of
petitioner’s accounts,[8] copies of which are attached
8With respect to the “transcripts of petitioner’s accounts”
to which the settlement officer referred in the settlement
officer’s declaration, petitioner asserts:
the alleged ‘transcripts’ * * * are nothing but indeci-
pherable, computer coded gibberish. If anyone is to
make any sense of them, they must obviously be ‘de-
coded’. Respondent has presented absolutely nothing
for ‘decoding’ its ‘transcripts’. Moreover, there is
nothing in the administrative record to indicate that
any decoding actually took place, or, if any did take
place, that it is correct.
We reject those assertions. The respective “transcripts of
petitioner’s accounts” with respect to petitioner’s taxable years
2001 and 2002 are coded computer-generated transcripts (coded
transcripts of account) that show certain information in the
official computer records of the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
with respect to those years. The respective Forms 4340 with
respect to petitioner’s taxable years 2001 and 2002 are noncoded
computer-generated transcripts that show certain information in
those same official computer records with respect to those years.
(continued...)
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007