David and Monika Zisskind - Page 7

                                        - 7 -                                         
          may request an Appeals hearing within 30 days beginning on the              
          day after the 5-day period described above.  Sec. 6320(a)(3)(B)             
          and (b)(1).  Section 6320(c) provides that the Appeals hearing              
          generally shall be conducted consistent with the procedures set             
          forth in section 6330.                                                      
               Section 6330(c) provides for review with respect to                    
          collection issues such as the appropriateness of the                        
          Commissioner’s proposed collection actions and the possibility of           
          collection alternatives.  Sec. 6330(c)(2)(A).  The taxpayer may             
          also challenge the amount of the underlying tax liability if a              
          statutory notice of deficiency was not received or the taxpayer             
          did not otherwise have an opportunity to dispute the tax                    
          liability.  Sec. 6330(c)(2)(B).                                             
               Pursuant to section 6330(d)(1), within 30 days of the                  
          issuance of a notice of determination the taxpayer may appeal the           
          determination to this Court if we have jurisdiction over the                
          underlying tax liability.  Where the validity of the underlying             
          tax liability is properly at issue, the Court will review the               
          matter de novo.  Sego v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 604, 610 (2000);            
          Goza v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 176, 181 (2000).  Where the                  
          validity of the underlying tax liability is not properly at                 
          issue, however, the Court will review the Commissioner’s                    
          determination for an abuse of discretion.  Sego v. Commissioner,            
          supra at 610; Goza v. Commissioner, supra at 181.                           

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007