Richard N. Pate - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
          required by section 6330(c)(1) where the Appeals officer obtained           
          and reviewed a so-called TXMODA computer-generated transcript to            
          verify that assessments were properly made and that notice and              
          demand for payment had been issued to the taxpayer on the date of           
          assessment.  See, e.g., Harp v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-83;           
          Kubon v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-71; Tornichio v.                     
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-291; Schroeder v. Commissioner,               
          T.C. Memo. 2002-190; Weishan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2002-88,           
          affd. 66 Fed. Appx. 113 (9th Cir. 2003).                                    
               Petitioner does not dispute that the Appeals settlement                
          officer reviewed a TXMODA computer transcript to verify that the            
          assessments for petitioner’s 2003 taxes were properly made and              
          that notice and demand for payment was issued to petitioner on              
          the date of assessment.  Petitioner has not alleged, and the                
          record does not suggest, any irregularity in the assessment                 
          procedure.  We conclude that the Appeals settlement officer                 
          properly verified that the requirements of applicable laws and              
          administrative procedures had been met, as required by section              
          6330(c)(1).                                                                 
               In his objection to respondent’s motion for summary                    
          judgment, petitioner acknowledges that he “did not challenge the            
          underlying liability at the time of the petition”.  Petitioner              
          now urges, however, that his underlying liability for a tax                 






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007