- 12 -
liability, including a liability reported on the taxpayer’s
original return, if the taxpayer “did not receive any statutory
notice of deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise
have an opportunity to dispute such tax liability.” Sec.
6330(c)(2)(B); see also Urbano v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 384,
389-390 (2004); Montgomery v. Commissioner, 122 T.C. 1, 9-10
(2004).
At the conclusion of the hearing, the Appeals officer must
determine whether and how to proceed with collection, taking into
account, among other things, collection alternatives proposed by
the taxpayer and whether any proposed collection action balances
the need for the efficient collection of taxes with the
legitimate concern of the taxpayer that the collection action be
no more intrusive than necessary. See sec. 6330(c)(3).
Section 6330(d) provides for judicial review of the
administrative determination in the Tax Court or a Federal
District Court, as may be appropriate. Where the validity of the
underlying tax liability is properly at issue, the Court will
review the matter de novo. Where the validity of the underlying
tax liability is not properly at issue, however, the Court will
review the Commissioner’s administrative determination for abuse
of discretion. Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000);
Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181-183 (2000). Whether an
abuse of discretion has occurred depends upon whether the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011