Yet again Judge Joseph W. Nega raises the doleful cry of the Man From Mumbai, and the unfortunate recipient is Jason Cutler, Docket No. 4023-23L, filed 1/23/26.

IRS dinged Jason for two (count ’em, two) fraudulent returns, and a late-filed one. He never petitioned the SND for the two, and the late filed one yielded add-ons, no deficiency (and IRS abates the add-ons, Order, at p. 3). So this comes up in a CDP.

Jason claims his bankruptcy discharge knocks out the deficiencies and chops.

Negatory, says Judge Nega.

“When a petitioner challenges a collection action by alleging that the tax debt was discharged in bankruptcy, that constitutes a ‘challenge to the appropriateness of collection actions’ under section 6330(c)(2)(A) and does not constitute a challenge to the ‘existence or amount of the underlying tax liability’ under section 6330(c)(2)(B).” Order, at p. 5. (Citation omitted).

So abuse of discretion is standard of review.

“For tax years [fraud], AO K determined that the assessments were not dischargeable in bankruptcy because those assessments related to fraudulent returns. See 11 U.S.C. § 523(a)(1)(C) (providing that a debt ‘with respect to which’ a debtor made a fraudulent return is not discharged by a bankruptcy discharge order). Since respondent has shown that a Notice of Deficiency asserting section 6663 fraud…was mailed to petitioner’s last known address and that petitioner did not challenge the fraud determinations by filing a petition with this Court, it is not an abuse of discretion for AO K to determine that the… assessments were not discharged by the Bankruptcy Court.” Order, at p. 6. (Name omitted).

Jason claims IRS never filed Proof of Claim in his bankruptcy proceeding, and therefore waived any claim.

“Petitioner contends that the IRS failed to object or file a claim in bankruptcy and argues that this makes the debts discharged even if those debts might otherwise be non-dischargeable. Respondent disagrees with petitioner and contends that the IRS did file a claim. Regardless of whether or not the IRS filed a claim in the bankruptcy proceeding, the debts from [all three] tax years were not discharged by the Bankruptcy Court’s discharge order because they were excepted from discharge by 11 U.S.C. § 523. AO K did not abuse his discretion by sustaining the levy action….” Order, at p. 7. (Citation omitted).