- 5 - concluded that the check was returned for insufficient funds. Moreover, there is no evidence that petitioner raised the computational issue during the section 6330 hearing. We agree with respondent that, for failure to raise the computational issue during the section 6330 hearing, petitioner is precluded from raising it with us. See Giamelli v. Commissioner, 129 T.C. , (2007) (slip op. at 15) (“we do not have authority to consider section 6330(c)(2) issues that were not raised before the Appeals Office”); Magana v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 488, 493 (2002) (“in our review for an abuse of discretion under section 6330(d)(1) * * * generally we consider only arguments, issues, and other matter that were raised at the collection hearing”); sec. 301.6330-1(f)(2), Q&A-F5, Proced. & Admin. Regs. (2002). Petitioner has failed to prove that Appeals erred in making the determination. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5Last modified: March 27, 2008