- 11 -
well as various additions to tax. The parties stipulated that
petitioner was entitled to a prepayment credit of $24,844 for
1998 and that the deficiency of $34,163 was computed without
taking that credit into account.
Petitioner nevertheless contends that respondent should not
be permitted to proceed with the proposed levy at issue in this
case because she owes nothing for 1998. Specifically, petitioner
avers that the period of limitations governing collection for the
taxable years 1982 and 1985 expired before respondent collected
funds from her retirement account in 1998 and, as a result,
respondent erred insofar as he applied those funds to her
accounts for the years 1982 and 1985. As petitioner sees it, the
amounts so applied to her accounts for the taxable years 1982 and
1985 should have been applied instead as prepayment credits to
completely offset any amount that she owes for 1998.
Respondent concedes, contrary to a statement in the notice
of determination, that the Court did not address petitioner’s
claim to prepayment credits from 1982 and 1985 in connection with
the agreed decision entered in petitioner’s deficiency case at
docket No. 9419-01. On the other hand, respondent maintains that
petitioner is barred under section 6330(c)(4) from raising the
prepayment credits issue in this collection review proceeding
because petitioner already raised that issue in refund claims
that she submitted to respondent for the taxable years 1982 and
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: March 27, 2008