Go to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.comGo to Wolters Kluwer VitalLaw.com
VitalLaw®
  • Find answers to your questions
  • Log in to access your subscriptions
In depth. On point.
In depth. On point.
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
  • Home
  • Legal Directory
In depth. On point.
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Organizations
  • Organizations
    • FinCEN Postpones Investment Adviser Rule Until 2028 (FinCEN Final Rule RIN 1506-AB58 and 1506-AB69)
    • IRS Assessment Was Proper Supplemental Assessment, Amended Liability Claim Allowed (In re Kossoff PLLC, DC N.Y.)
    • IRS Did Not Abuse Discretion in Rejecting Offer-in-Compromise and Sustaining Lien (Crawford, TCM)
    • IRS Issues Additional Guidance on Retroactive Qualified Electing Fund Ruling Requests (Rev. Proc. 2026-10)
    • IRS Properly Denied Refund to Individuals Based on Issue Preclusion (Palaniappan, CA-9)
    • Individual Not Entitled to Continue Collection Due Process Challenge (Dunn, TCM)
    • OECD Releases Pillar Two Side-by-Side Guidance
    • Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund Financing Rate Expiration Impact (Ann. 2026-2)
    • This Week's CCH FEDERAL TAX WEEKLY, Issue No. 02, Now Available
  • Articles
  • Articles
  • Organizations
  • Organizations

    Federal Tax Day - Current, J.1, Individual Not Entitled to Continue Collection Due Process Challenge (Dunn, TCM), (Jan 8, 2026)

    An individual was not entitled to continue a collection due process (CDP) challenge under Code Sec. 6330 after requesting voluntary dismissal. The Tax Court granted dismissal without prejudice, finding that the case was no longer being pursued and th ...

    An individual was not entitled to continue a collection due process (CDP) challenge under Code Sec. 6330 after requesting voluntary dismissal. The Tax Court granted dismissal without prejudice, finding that the case was no longer being pursued and the IRS would not suffer legal prejudice.

    The individual requested a CDP hearing in response to a proposed levy but failed to appear for a scheduled conference or respond to follow-up correspondence. The Appeals Office sustained the proposed levy and issued a Notice of Determination under Code Sec. 6330(c)(3). A timely petition was filed, followed by a motion to dismiss without cause.

    The Court allowed voluntary dismissal due to absence of any legal prejudice. Although Code Sec. 6330(d)(1) provides a 30-day petition period, the Court noted under established precedent that the deadline is non-jurisdictional and subject to equitable tolling.

    J. Dunn, TC Memo. 2026-2, Dec. 62,802(M)

    Other References:

    • Code Sec. 6330

    • CCH Reference - FED ¶38,184.105

    © 2026 CCH Incorporated and its affiliates and licensors. All rights reserved.

    • Manage Cookie Preferences
    • Privacy Statement
    • Terms of Use