Shlomo Limor - Page 4




                                        - 3 -                                         
               Respondent sent petitioner Letter 1058, Notice of Intent to            
          Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing, for 2002.  Petitioner           
          timely requested a hearing.  The only issue raised in his request           
          for a hearing was the underlying tax liability.  During a                   
          telephone hearing, the Appeals officer informed petitioner that             
          he was not allowed to raise his underlying tax liability because            
          he had received a statutory notice of deficiency.  Petitioner               
          raised no other issue.  The only issue raised by the petition in            
          this case is petitioner’s underlying tax liability.                         
                                   Discussion                                         
               Respondent reasons that since the only issue that petitioner           
          has raised questions the underlying tax liability, respondent is            
          entitled to a ruling in his favor as a matter of law.  The Court            
          agrees with respondent.                                                     
          Standard for Granting Summary Judgment                                      
               The standard for granting a motion for summary judgment                
          under Rule 121 is that                                                      
               A decision shall * * * be rendered if the pleadings,                   
               answers to interrogatories, depositions, admissions,                   
               and any other acceptable materials, together with the                  
               affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue                
               as to any material fact and that a decision may be                     
               rendered as a matter of law. * * *  [Rule 121(b).2]                    



               2Rule 121 is derived from Fed. R. Civ. P. 56.  Therefore,              
          authorities interpreting the latter will be considered by the               
          Court in applying our Rule.  Espinoza v. Commissioner, 78 T.C.              
          412, 415-416 (1982).                                                        





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007