- 7 -
case was filed in response to the lien notice and not in response
to a notice of determination as mandated by statute. Therefore,
we may not, as we lack jurisdiction, address the propriety of the
filing of the lien in this case.
The foregoing is dispositive of the matter before us.
However, even if petitioners had filed with the Court a petition
appealing from a notice of determination issued by respondent’s
Office of Appeals following a timely request for an
administrative hearing, we would still be obliged to grant
respondent’s motion, as supplemented, and dismiss this case.
Thus, in Greene-Thapedi v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 1 (2006), the
Court held: (1) The taxpayer’s challenges to the Commissioner’s
collection action (a proposed levy) were moot because there was
no unpaid tax liability upon which a levy could be based and the
Commissioner would not take any further collection action; (2)
this Court lacks jurisdiction in a lien or levy case (collection
review case) to determine an overpayment or to order a refund or
credit of taxes; and (3) the taxpayer’s case should be dismissed
as moot.
In the present case, petitioners’ unpaid assessed liability
is zero for each of the 4 years in issue. Although a few cents
of accrued interest may remain for 1998 and 2003, respondent’s
counsel has represented that respondent has, as a matter of
policy, written off such amounts as de minimis and does not seek
to collect them. This representation is confirmed by the fact
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007