Jeffrey Sandor Orling - Page 6




                                        - 5 -                                         
          employee of respondent’s Appeals Office.  Sec. 6330(b).  At the             
          hearing, a taxpayer may raise any relevant issue relating to the            
          unpaid tax or the proposed levy, including collection                       
          alternatives.  Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A).  The taxpayer may challenge              
          the existence or amount of the underlying tax liability, however,           
          only if the taxpayer failed to receive a statutory notice of                
          deficiency for such tax liability or did not otherwise have an              
          earlier opportunity to dispute such tax liability.  Sec.                    
          6330(c)(2)(B).                                                              
               Section 6330(d)(1)(A) grants this Court jurisdiction to                
          review the Appeals officer’s determination.  Where the underlying           
          tax liability is not properly at issue, we review the                       
          determination for abuse of discretion.  Goza v. Commissioner, 114           
          T.C. 176, 181-182 (2000).                                                   
               Petitioner maintains that he is not precluded from                     
          contesting the underlying liability for 2002 because he did not             
          receive the notice of deficiency.  Petitioner was given an                  
          opportunity to testify at the hearing and to produce any other              
          evidence he had to support his allegation.  Petitioner’s                    
          testimony and the documents he provided do not create a genuine             
          factual issue regarding his receipt of the notice of deficiency.            
          Petitioner offers only his testimony that he never received the             
          notice of deficiency, about which he himself gave conflicting               
          testimony.  Petitioner simply has not provided credible factual             







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007