Richard M. Downing - Page 14
- 14 -
liability is properly at issue, we review that issue de novo.
See Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 609-610 (2000). Other
issues we review for abuse of discretion. Id.
B. Petitioner’s Challenge to the Notice of Determination
Petitioner challenges respondent’s final notice of
determination with respect to the notice of Federal tax lien
filing for his 1995 and 1999 tax years. Petitioner contends that
respondent’s assessment of his 1995 income tax was time barred
because he and Astrid Downing filed their 1995 joint amended
return in October 1996 but assessment did not occur until 2001,
well beyond the expiration of the 3-year limitations period of
section 6501(a).6 Respondent contends that section 6330(c)(2)(B)
precludes petitioner from raising this issue in this proceeding.
1. Limitation on Challenging Underlying Liability
Section 6330(c)(2) prescribes the matters that a person may
raise at an Appeals Office hearing, including spousal defenses,
challenges to the appropriateness of the Commissioner’s intended
6 Petitioner does not dispute the assessment of his 1999
income tax, which was based on amounts reported on but not paid
with his 1999 return. In his petition, petitioner’s prayer for
relief included a request that the Court order respondent to
offset any unpaid balance on his 1999 account by application of
certain amounts that respondent has allegedly collected from
petitioner and to refund certain remaining amounts. Petitioner
has not raised this claim for relief in his trial memorandum or
on brief. We deem petitioner to have abandoned any such claim
for relief. In any event, this Court lacks jurisdiction in a
collection review proceeding to order a refund or credit of tax.
Greene-Thapedi v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 1 (2006).
Page: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21
Last modified: November 10, 2007