- 15 -
effect as did the failure to timely request a section 6330
hearing in Orum v. Commissioner, supra at 11.
While admitting that their November 2004 payment was not
timely and that they failed to make estimated tax payments as
required by the installment agreement, petitioners contend that
respondent unjustifiably terminated the installment agreement.
Petitioners do not allege that the termination of the installment
agreement was the result of clerical error, misdirected mail, or
the like. They do not dispute that they received the statutory
notices to which they were entitled, were afforded an equivalent
hearing in response to their second (untimely) request for a
section 6330 hearing, and obtained immediate relief from the levy
on their bank account upon respondent’s receipt of their second
request for a section 6330 hearing. Petitioners also do not
dispute that at the time of the equivalent hearing in November of
2005, they were not in compliance with their obligations under
the installment agreement.
Based on the aforesaid, we hold that petitioners were not
entitled to a section 6330 hearing, and respondent was not
required to issue a notice of determination. Respondent’s
decision letter was not a determination for purposes of section
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007