- 20 -
respondent’s decision to examine, or not or examine, a taxpayer’s
income tax return for a particular taxable year involves the
exercise of judgment and discretion. Respondent’s decision in
that regard is not, therefore, a ministerial act, see sec.
301.6404-2T(b)(1), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., supra, and
cannot provide a basis for abating interest under section
6404(e).
Section 301.6404-2T(b)(1), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs.,
supra, may very well provide a sufficient foundation on which to
enter decision for respondent. Nevertheless, we will review the
relevant facts and circumstances for each of the years in issue
in order to decide whether there was an error or delay by
respondent in performing a ministerial act after the operative
date (as identified supra p. 19) that might justify an abatement
of interest.
A. The Taxable Year 1993
In or about July 1996, petitioner was notified in writing of
the examination of her 1993 income tax return through the receipt
of an examination report (the so-called 30-day letter) dated July
19, 1996. Petitioner responded to the examination report timely
by mailing a letter, together with a $1,500 check, which the
Atlanta Service Center received on August 22, 1996. However,
because petitioner’s letter was apparently not forwarded to the
examining agent, respondent sent petitioner a notice of
deficiency, which prompted petitioner to file a petition with
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011