- 17 -
further support of their position that the Court should not
sustain the determinations in the notice of determination, Mr.
Gazi and Ms. Gazi’s estate argue that respondent abused respon-
dent’s discretion in making those determinations because the
settlement officer refused “to grant Petitioner additional time
to submit an Offer in Compromise as a collection alternative in
this matter.”
We turn first to the argument of Mr. Gazi and Ms. Gazi’s
estate that they are not liable for the Gazis’ unpaid liabilities
for 1983 through 1989. A taxpayer may raise challenges to the
existence or the amount of the taxpayer's underlying tax liabil-
ity 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 a notice of deficiency to
the Gazis with respect to their taxable years 1983 through 1989.
The Gazis filed a petition with the Court with respect to that
notice. On July 8, 2003, the Court entered a decision in the
Gazis’ Tax Court case. That decision ordered and decided that
for the Gazis’ taxable years 1983 through 1989 the Gazis are
liable for deficiencies in their tax totaling $219,723 and
certain additions to tax totaling $376,041.33. On March 12,
8(...continued)
appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit or the
motion for reconsideration of the July 28, 2005 Opinion operated
as a stay of the collection of the Gazis’ unpaid liabilities for
1983 through 1989.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008