- 7 -
On September 20, 1996, petitioner filed a response to
respondent's objection. Petitioner contends that respondent
erroneously assessed interest computed at the increased rate
prescribed in section 6621(c) on the ground that it violates--
the stipulation of Docket # 11547-90, paragraph (g),
which waived the restriction of assessment for the
TEFRA partnership, paragraph (f), and invokes the
suspension of interest per I.R.C. 6601(c).
On October 15, 1996, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss
for Lack of Jurisdiction and to Strike the Claims Relating to the
Increased Interest Pursuant to Former I.R.C. Section 6621(c),
along with a supporting memorandum. Specifically, relying on
White v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. 209 (1990), and Odend'hal v.
Commissioner, 95 T.C. 617 (1990), respondent contends that, in a
case based upon an affected items notice of deficiency which
pertains solely to additions to tax, this Court lacks the
authority, in the exercise of its jurisdiction to redetermine a
deficiency, to consider a taxpayer's liability for interest
computed at the increased rate prescribed in section 6621(c).
Respondent further contends that petitioners have not overpaid
the interest in dispute (whether such interest is computed at the
normal rate prescribed in section 6621(a)(2) or the increased
rate prescribed in section 6621(c)), and, therefore, the Court
lacks jurisdiction to determine an overpayment under section
6512(b). See Barton v. Commissioner, supra; Greene v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-105. In support of the latter
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011