As the late great Yul Brynner so eloquently put Oscar Hammerstein II’s words in the 1951 smash-hit “The King and I”, STJ Lewis (Love That Name) Carluzzo confronts a similar predicament. No great legal principles here, but a good example of what a 19-year veteran STJ must deal with.

IRS’ NOD to Phil Filet Davis-Windsor, in Docket No. 15962-12L, filed 5/16/13, doesn’t sustain the proposed levy based on a Section 6702 frivolity penalty. So Phil Filet won, right?

It would seem so, but Phil Filet petitions nevertheless, although STJ Lew is at a loss to figure out why, because Phil Filet’s petition doesn’t enlighten him.

And IRS moves for summary judgment sustaining its determination that Phil Filet is off the levy hook. Of course, Phil Filet objects.

See my blogpost “You Won, Go Home”, 9/13/12. But there the taxpayer had an argument, although a losing one. Here, Phil Filet has nada.

“Taking into account the determination made in the notice and statements contained in the pleadings, the issue presented in this case can be stated as follows: whether respondent’s determination not to sustain the proposed levy in order to collect the underlying liability is an abuse of discretion. Adjudication of this issue in respondent’s favor, of course and in effect, is adjudication in petitioner’s favor as well. This point appears to have been lost on petitioner because, as noted, he objects to respondent’s motion. Petitioner’s objection, however, is no more informative than his petition.

“Be that as it may, and making what sense that we can from what has been submitted, we are satisfied that respondent has proceeded as required by section 6330(d) and nothing submitted by petitioner suggests otherwise.” Order, p. 2.

So summary judgment, and Phil Filet, you won, go home.