Alan Lee and Debi Marie Kuykendall - Page 5




                                         -5-                                          
               On August 17, 2004, Appeals Officer Terrence Riddle                    
          conducted a face-to-face hearing with Ms. Kuykendall.  At the               
          hearing, petitioners sought to challenge the underlying tax                 
          liability by providing documentation to substantiate the                    
          disallowed deductions.  Officer Riddle determined that                      
          petitioners could not properly challenge the underlying tax                 
          liability at the hearing because they previously had the                    
          opportunity to petition this Court for review of the deficiency.            
          As to the examiner’s decision not to postpone the audit, Officer            
          Riddle determined that petitioners were allowed a reasonable                
          amount of time in which to respond to the audit report.                     
               On July 20, 2006, respondent issued a notice of                        
          determination sustaining the proposed collection action for 1999.           
          Petitioners timely filed a petition with this Court.  In the                
          petition, they sought to challenge the underlying tax liability             
          by asserting that the disallowed deductions were valid.                     
          Petitioners also challenged respondent’s failure to postpone the            
          examination of their 1999 return.                                           
               On June 19, 2007, respondent filed a motion for summary                
          judgment on all issues in the case.  On July 27, 2007,                      
          petitioners filed their response.                                           
                                     Discussion                                       
               Summary judgment is intended to expedite litigation and                
          avoid unnecessary and expensive trials.  Fla. Peach Corp. v.                







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007