- 8 -
116 T.C. 263, 269 (2001); Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492,
498 (2000); see also Rule 330(b).
Petitioner never requested an administrative hearing.
Instead, he responded to the Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing by
mailing in a check. Thus, because petitioner never requested a
hearing, respondent had no occasion to issue a notice of
determination. In short, the petition in this case was filed in
response to a notice of deficiency issued pursuant to section
6213(a) and not a notice of determination under section 6320 or
6330. Therefore, we may not, and we shall not, address the
propriety of the filing of the lien in this case.5
B. The Notice of Deficiency
When petitioner first disputed imposition of the civil fraud
penalties, the IRS bifurcated petitioner’s potential liabilities
into two parts: Underpayments of tax, the assessment of which
was agreed to by petitioner when he signed the Form 4549 and the
waiver in July 2005; and the civil fraud penalties, subsequently
determined in the notice of deficiency sent to petitioner in
December 2005. Our jurisdiction in the instant case is based on
the notice of deficiency.
5 Further on the subject of this Court’s jurisdiction, it
is clear that in an action for redetermination, such as the
present one, matters involving statutory interest under sec. 6601
are not generally before us and will therefore not be considered.
E.g., Bax v. Commissioner, 13 F.3d 54, 56-57 (2d Cir. 1993); Pen
Coal Corp. v. Commissioner, 107 T.C. 249, 255 (1996); LTV Corp.
v. Commissioner, 64 T.C. 589, 597 (1975).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007