- 12 -
under section 6404 respondent’s failure to abate those additions
to tax. We hold that we do not have jurisdiction to do so. See
sec. 6404(h); see also Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 114,
124 n.15 (2003); Krugman v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 230, 237
(1999).
We now address petitioner’s allegation in the petition that
the 2000 and 2001 notice and the 2002 notice are wrong. A
taxpayer may raise challenges to the existence or the amount of
the taxpayer’s underlying tax liability if the taxpayer did not
receive a notice of deficiency or did not otherwise have an
opportunity to dispute the tax liability. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
Respondent issued to petitioner the 2000 and 2001 notice and
the 2002 notice, which he received. Petitioner did not file a
petition with the Court with respect to either of those notices.
On the instant record, we find that petitioner may not challenge
the existence or the amount of the underlying tax liability,
including any additions to tax,5 for each of his taxable years
5Assuming arguendo that petitioner’s allegation in the
petition that the Court should abate the respective additions to
tax for his taxable years 2000, 2001, and 2002 is not intended as
a request by petitioner for the Court to review under sec. 6404
respondent’s failure to abate those additions, but instead is a
request to review de novo the propriety of those additions to
tax, we shall not do so. That is because the phrase “underlying
tax liability” in sec. 6330(c)(2)(B) is “a reference to the
amounts that the Commissioner assessed for a particular tax
period.” Montgomery v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 1, 7 (2004). What
the Court concluded in Montgomery applies in the instant case:
“petitioners’ underlying tax liability consists of the amount
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007