- 2 -
reviewable by any other court, and this opinion shall not be
treated as precedent for any other case.
This matter is before the Court on respondent’s motion for
summary judgment pursuant to Rule 121. This case results from a
timely petition of respondent’s notice of determination
sustaining respondent’s intent to levy regarding petitioner’s
income tax liability for 2002. Because we determine that
petitioner may not raise the underlying tax liability in this
proceeding, we find no abuse of discretion in respondent’s
determination, and we shall grant respondent’s motion for summary
judgment.
Background
On March 31, 2003, respondent issued a notice of deficiency
to petitioner for the taxable year ended December 31, 2002.
Respondent determined a deficiency of $12,758, which was based on
the disallowance of certain deductions claimed on Schedule C,
Profit or Loss From Business, and itemized deductions claimed on
Schedule A, Itemized Deductions. A petition to this Court was
not filed in response to this notice of deficiency.
Petitioner gave conflicting testimony relative to the
receipt of the notice of deficiency, which was mailed to
petitioner’s address, the same address at which he currently
resides. Initially, petitioner admitted receiving the notice of
deficiency. Later, he testified he could not remember whether he
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007