- 7 -
In response to the notice of determination, petitioner filed
his petition with this Court on August 25, 2005.
I. Standard of Review
Where the validity of the underlying tax liability is
properly at issue, the Court will review the matter de novo.
Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000); Goza v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181 (2000).7 The underlying tax
liability is properly at issue if the taxpayer did not receive a
statutory notice of deficiency or otherwise have an opportunity
to dispute the tax liability. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B); see Behling v.
Commissioner, 118 T.C. 572, 576-577 (2002).
Where the validity of the underlying tax liability is not
properly at issue the Court will review the Commissioner’s
determination for abuse of discretion. Sego v. Commissioner,
supra at 610; Goza v. Commissioner, supra at 181. The abuse of
discretion standard requires the Court to decide whether the
Commissioner’s determination was arbitrary, capricious, or
without sound basis in fact or law. Woodral v. Commissioner, 112
T.C. 19, 23 (1999); Keller v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-166;
Fowler v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2004-163.
7 The term “underlying tax liability” under sec.
6330(c)(2)(B) includes amounts self-assessed under sec. 6201(a),
together with penalties and interest. Sec. 6201(a)(1);
Montgomery v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 1, 9 (2004); sec.
301.6201-1, Proced. & Admin. Regs.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007