TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Allan L. Overland
Docket Number: 18008-10L
Judge: Kroupa
Opinion Type: bench
Filed: 10/11/2011
Pages: 5

UNITED STATES TAX COURT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20217 ALLAN L. OVERLAND, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Docket No. 18008-10L Pursuant to Rule 152(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, it is O R D E R ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall petitioner and to respondent a copy of transciript of Diane L. Kroupa aÍt Seattle, Washington, on September 15, 2011, containing her oral the above case before Judge the! proceedings of findings of fact and opinion. the pages of transmit the to In accordance with the oral findings of fact and opinion, decision will be entered for respondent. (Signed) Diane L. Kroupa Judge Date: Washington, D.C. !October 11, 2011 SERVED OCT f 2 2011 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 Bench OpLnion by Judge Diane L. Kroupa Septembec 15, 2011 Overland v. Commissioner Docket No. 18008-10 THE COURT: The Court has decided to render oral findings of fact and opinion in this case, and the following represents the Court's oral findings of fact and opinion. The oral findings of fact and opinion shall not be relied upon as precedent in any other case. This bench opinion is made pursuant to the authority granted in § 7459(b) and Rule 152. All section references are to the Internal Revenue Code as amended and in effect for 2006, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court's Rules of Practice and Procedure. This is a case involving the failure to file a tax return, subsequent assessment of tax by Respondent and the filing of a notice of federal tax levy to collection Petitioner's unpaid liabilities for taxable year 2006. This matter is before the Court on Respondent's motion for summary judgment filed on July 12, 2011. Petitioner filed an objection to Respondent's motion on August 16, 2011. Allan Overland appeared on his own behalf. Patsy C]arke appeared on behalf of Respondent. Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 4 Findings of Fact and Opinion. The record establishes or the parties do not dispute the (cid:16)042 following facts. Petitioner resided in Washington at the time he filed the collection review petition. Petitioner failed to file his individual income tax return for 2006. Respondent mailed a statutory deficiency inotice for 2006 to Petitioner. As Petitioner did not petition this Court with respect to the deficiency, Respondent assessed Petitioner's income tax liability for 2006. Respondent issued to Petitioner a Letter , 1058 dated October 12, 2009, entitled Final Notice of Intent to Levy and Your Right to a Hearing for the outstancing tax liability at issue. In response to the levy notice, Petitioner requested a hearing (CDP hearing) . Respondent allowed Petitioner to challenge the unde rlying tax liability at the CDP hearing because the settlement officer assigned to the case was unable to confirm that Petitioner had received the deficier.cy notice. During the telephonic hearing Petitior er challenged the underlying tax liability and indicated that he had not received the amount of income as reported on the substitute for return. The settlement officer advised Petitioner Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 5 that he must submit a tax return for 2006 and documentation to support his position before she could determin3 whether the underlying tax liability should be adjusted. Petitioner agreed to do so before May 12, 2010. The settlement offîcer further advised Petition r to submit tax returns for 2007 and 2008 as soon as possible. Despite Petitioner's untimely request, the settlement officer extended the deadline to submit the requested information by 19 days. Petitioner again to submit the tax return and supporting documentation before the extended deadline. Petitioner did not request an installment agreement or offer any collection alternatives. He also did not provide any of the requested information. Accordirgly, the settlement officer issued a notice of determination permitting the collection to proceed. Petitior.er timely filed a petition. We held a hearing on Respondent's summary judgment motion at our Seattle, Washington, trial session on September 12, 2011. Petitioner conceded that he owes the deficiency and additions to tax asserted by Respondent. He further conceded that Respondent is entitled to summary judgment. To reflect the foregoing, decision will be Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 entered Eor Respondent and an appropriate order will be issued sustaining the determinations set forth in the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under § 6320 and/or 6330 dated July 7, 2010, upon which this case is based regarding the unpaid liabilities for the taxable periods at issue. The order wi L1 also grant Respondent' s motion for summary judgment . This concludes the Court's oral findings of fact and opinion in this case. (Whereupon, at 12:42 p.m., the bench opinion in the aoove-entitled matter was concluded.) // // // // // // // // // // // // // Heritage Reporting Corporation (202) 628-4888