- 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: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007