Mohammed Ali Gazi and Estate of Raees Iftekhar Gazi, Deceased, Mohammed Ali Gazi, Personal Representative - Page 20




                                       - 20 -                                         
          requested that Mr. Gazi and Ms. Gazi’s estate submit Form 433-A             
          within 14 days of the date of that letter, i.e., by April 10,               
          2006.  Mr. Gazi and Ms. Gazi’s estate did not submit Form 433-A             
          by April 10, 2006.  On April 18, 2006, at the request of Ms.                
          Ciraolo, the settlement officer agreed to reschedule the Appeals            
          Office hearing from April 25 to May 15, 2006.  On May 15, 2006,             
          the day on which the rescheduled Appeals Office hearing was to be           
          held, Ms. Ciraolo called the settlement officer to inform him               
          that Mr. Gazi and Ms. Gazi’s estate were still not ready to                 
          submit Form 433-A and to request that the Appeals Office hearing            
          be rescheduled to at least one week later.  The settlement                  
          officer refused to reschedule the Appeals Office hearing, but               
          advised Ms. Ciraolo that, when Mr. Gazi and Ms. Gazi’s estate               
          were ready to submit Form 433-A, they could do so with a request            
          for an installment agreement through respondent’s compliance                
          division.  Mr. Gazi and Ms. Gazi’s estate did not submit Form               
          433-A and their offer-in-compromise until July 13, 2006, almost             
          two months after Ms. Ciraolo requested another rescheduling of              
          the Appeals Office hearing from May 15, 2006, to at least one               
          week later.                                                                 
               Based upon our examination of the entire record before us,             
          we find that respondent did not abuse respondent’s discretion in            
          making the determinations in the notice of determination with               
          respect to the notice of intent to levy.  On that record, we                







Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008