Mark Lewis Tracton - Page 8




                                        - 7 -                                         
          liability.  Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B); Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C.              
          604, 609 (2000); Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 180-181                
          (2000).  A prior opportunity to dispute the underlying tax                  
          liability includes a prior hearing pursuant to section 6330                 
          concerning the liability where the taxpayer fails to seek                   
          judicial review of the Appeals Office's determination arising               
          from that hearing.  Bell v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 356 (2006).              
               The sole material3 issue raised by petitioner at his hearing           
          and at trial with respect to the unpaid 1997 tax and the lien is            
          his claim that he did not receive the income that gave rise to              
          the unpaid liability.  Respondent argues that petitioner's                  
          contention constitutes a challenge to the underlying tax                    
          liability for 1997 that is precluded under section 6330(c)(2)(B)            
          because petitioner had a previous opportunity to dispute the                
          liability.  We agree.                                                       



               3 Two other immaterial issues were raised by petitioner.               
          First, petitioner complains of respondent's failure to provide              
          him with a copy of his 1997 return.  The Appeals officer,                   
          however, was not required to furnish documentation or information           
          to petitioner beyond proof of the assessment.  See, e.g., Nestor            
          v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. 162, 166-167 (2002); Scott v.                     
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2007-91.  Second, petitioner complains             
          that respondent has sent information regarding petitioner's tax             
          liabilities to an unauthorized third party.  Our jurisdiction in            
          this case is limited to the issue of whether respondent may                 
          proceed with the proposed collection action.  Petitioner's remedy           
          for any unauthorized disclosure of his personal tax information             
          lies in the U.S. District Court.  See sec. 7431.                            







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

Last modified: November 10, 2007