- 8 -
provides that a person may raise collection issues such as
spousal defenses, the appropriateness of the Commissioner's
intended collection action, and possible alternative means of
collection. Section 6330(c)(2)(B) provides that the existence
and amount of the underlying tax liability can be contested at an
Appeals Office hearing only if the person did not receive a
notice of deficiency for the tax in question or did not otherwise
have an earlier opportunity to dispute the tax liability. See
Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 609 (2000); Goza v.
Commissioner, supra. Section 6330(d) provides for judicial
review of the administrative determination.
In the present case, petitioners seek only to challenge the
existence or amount of their underlying liability for 2002.
However, petitioners are legally precluded from doing so if they
received the July 29, 2004 notice of deficiency and chose not to
contest respondent’s determination by filing a petition for
redetermination with this Court. Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).
In this regard, there is nothing in the record to suggest
that petitioners did not receive the July 29, 2004 notice of
deficiency. Indeed, duplicate originals of the notice of
deficiency were mailed to petitioners by certified mail at their
last known address, which is also their current address.
Respondent represents that there is nothing in his files to
suggest that either of the notices was returned undelivered to
respondent by the U.S. Postal Service. In addition, petitioners
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007