- 12 -
liabilities (without distinction, liability), he could not
challenge the liability. Thus, at his collection due process
hearing, petitioner could raise only collection alternatives.
Although nothing prevented him from doing so, he did not raise
any collection alternative, nor did Ms. Davis present any basis
for innocent spouse relief. Finally, no other error assigned by
petitioner raised any justiciable issue or showed any abuse of
discretion by the settlement officer. Respondent also moved in
docket No. 146-05L (concerning Mr. Davis’s 1997 and 1998 taxable
years) that we impose a penalty on him under section 6673 in the
amount of $25,000, “as petitioner has instituted this proceeding
primarily for the purpose of delay, and petitioner’s position * *
* is frivolous or groundless.”
Petitioners’ Objections
On February 6, 2006, each petitioner filed an objection to
respondent’s motion for summary judgment. No petitioner disputed
that he failed to present collection alternatives. Each argued
that the settlement officer had not given him adequate time to
make his case. Each claimed that he required additional
information to prepare collection alternatives and to resolve
other issues relating to the years at issue. In docket Nos. 144-
05L, 145-05L, and 147-05L, petitioners specifically argued that
the settlement officer failed to allow additional time to
retrieve relevant documents from the IRS. Each petitioner argued
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007