- 6 - there is no genuine issue of material fact, and factual inferences will be read in the manner most favorable to the party opposing summary judgment. Dahlstrom v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 812, 821 (1985). When a motion for summary judgment is made and properly supported, the adverse party may not rest upon mere allegations or denials of the pleadings but must set forth specific facts showing that there is a genuine issue for trial. Rule 121(d); Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). We are satisfied that no genuine issues of material fact exist and judgment as a matter of law is appropriate. Under section 6330(c)(2)(B), a taxpayer may dispute the underlying liability in a collection review proceeding “if the person did not receive any statutory notice of deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute such tax liability.”2 Respondent interprets “otherwise have an opportunity to dispute such tax liability” to include a conference with Appeals.3 Sec. 301.6320-1(e)(3), Q&A-E2, Proced. 2 While Mr. Poppo alleges that he did not receive a notice of deficiency, no notice is required where the Commissioner assesses additions to tax under secs. 6651 and 6654 which are unrelated to a deficiency in tax. Sec. 6665(b). Accordingly, we do not address the applicability of sec. 301.6320-1(e)(3), Q&A- E2, Proced. & Admin. Regs., and the phrase “otherwise have an opportunity” in sec. 6330(c)(2) to situations requiring a notice of deficiency. 3 Respondent argues beyond the facts of this case that an offer of a conference with Appeals, even if the taxpayer does not take advantage of it, would also preclude subsequent (continued...)Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007