Washington v. Comm'r
United States Tax Court
Held: The Court has jurisdiction to determine whether the U.S. Bankruptcy Court discharged petitioners from their respective unpaid Federal income tax (tax) liabilities for their taxable years 1994 and 1995. Held, further, The U.S. Bankruptcy Court did not discharge petitioners from such liabilities.
Read the full summary
Held: The Court has jurisdiction to determine whether the U.S. Bankruptcy Court discharged petitioners from their respective unpaid Federal income tax (tax) liabilities for their taxable years 1994 and 1995. Held, further, The U.S. Bankruptcy Court did not discharge petitioners from such liabilities. Held, further, Respondent's application of petitioners' overpayment for their taxable year 1997 as a credit against their unpaid tax liability for their taxable year 1990, and not 1998, was proper. See sec. 6402(a), I.R.C. Held, further, Respondent may proceed with the collection action as…
1ConcurrenceHalpern, J.
I. Introduction
I concur with the conclusion of the majority that respondent may proceed with the collection action as determined in the notice of determination with respect to each of petitioners’ taxable years 1994, 1995, and 1998. I write separately principally to add some observations concerning what we have characterized as the “standard of review” (described infra) applicable to our jurisdiction under section 6330(d)(1) to review a section 6330 determination.
II. Section 6330
Section 6330 entitles a taxpayer to notice and an opportunity for a hearing before certain lien and levy actions…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Cooter & Gell v. Hartmarx Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1990
- Goza v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2000
- Sego v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 2000
- United States v. Carlo Bianchi & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Burton M. Abrams and Marguerite M. Abrams v. Interco IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1983
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.