- 5 - BRIEF BACKGROUND On February 7, 2006, Settlement Officer Elissa Dellosso sent you a letter giving you an opportunity for a telephonic hearing for March 9, 2006. You were advised in that letter that the underlying liability issue that was raised in your CDP request was precluded from this hearing, but that she would consider other collection alternatives. Ms. Dellosso sent you a Collection Information Statement to prepare and send back to her by February 21, 2006. She did not receive it. On March 6, 2006 you requested a postponement and a face to face hearing, which was granted. On March 15, 2006 you appeared in her office and she conducted a face-to- face hearing with you. You did not submit the Collec- tion Information Statement and stated you wanted an- other postponement because you had just hired a firm to represent you. This request was denied because you had sufficient time to obtain representation prior to the original scheduled hearing date. 1. Verification - Legal and Procedural Requirements a. General Verification Requirements The assessment was properly made per IRC § 6201 for the 12/31/1995 and 12/31/1998 tax periods. A statutory notice of deficiency was mailed to you via Certified Mail on June 10, 2002. The administrative file shows that on August 22, 2002 the US Tax Court ordered you to perfect the petition and pay the fee by 11/15/2002. You did not do so and the Court dismissed your case. The notice and demand for payment letter was mailed to your current address, within 60 days of the assessment, as required by IRC § 6303. There was a balance due when the CDP levy notice was requested. Ms. Dellosso verified the collection period allowed by statute to collect these taxes has been suspended by the appropriate computer codes for the tax periods at issue. There was no pending bankruptcy at the time the notices were issued.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007