- 5 -
With respect to a nonelecting spouse, section 6015 does not
provide an independent basis for this Court to exercise its
jurisdiction and to review the IRS’s decision to grant relief
unless there is a deficiency proceeding where the claim is raised
as an affirmative defense by the electing spouse pursuant to
section 6213(a), the electing spouse has filed a petition with
the Court under section 6015(e)(1)(A), or there is a petition for
review of a lien or levy action pursuant to section 6320(c) or
6330(d) and the claim for innocent spouse relief is raised as a
defense pursuant to section 6330(c)(2)(A)(i). See Maier v.
Commissioner, 360 F.3d at 365; cf. Hale Exemption Trust v.
Commissioner, supra; King v. Commissioner, 115 T.C. 118, 125
(2000); Corson v. Commissioner, supra; Baumann v. Commissioner,
supra. This results because section 6015(e)(1) contemplates that
the Court have jurisdiction only when the electing spouse has
timely filed a petition (and has satisfied certain other
requirements). The nonelecting spouse is only afforded a right
to notice and an opportunity to intervene once the electing
spouse has initiated a proceeding in this Court. See sec.
6015(e)(4); see also Rules 13(a), 320(b), 325(a) and (b), 330(b).
Here, the electing spouse did not petition the Court for
review under section 6015(e)(1)(A), the petition for review did
not arise within the context of a lien or levy action pursuant to
section 6320(c) or 6330(d), and the issue was not raised as an
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008