- 112 - The Supreme Court has held that respondent has broad discretion under section 7805(b) and its predecessor, in deciding to revoke a ruling retroactively, and that such a determination is reviewable by the courts only for abuse of that discretion. Automobile Club v. Commissioner, 353 U.S. 180, 184 (1957); see Dixon v. United States, 381 U.S. 68 (1965). See generally, Virginia Education Fund v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 743 (1985), affd. 799 F.2d 903 (4th Cir. 1986). More recently, in a different but analogous setting, we described review of exercise of discretion as follows: Whether the Commissioner has abused his discretion is a question of fact. Buzzetta Construction Corp. v. Commissioner, 92 T.C. 641, 649 (1989); Estate of Gardner v. Commissioner, 82 T.C. 989, 1000 (1984). In reviewing the Commissioner’s actions, however, we do not substitute our judgment for the Commissioner’s, nor do we permit taxpayers to carry their burden of proof by a mere preponderance of the evidence. Buzzetta Construction Corp. v. Commissioner, 28(...continued) provisions enacted after July 30, 1996, and so does not affect the instant case. We note that present sec. 7805(b)(8) provides as follows: SEC. 7805. RULES AND REGULATIONS. * * * * * * * (b) Retroactivity of Regulations.-- (8) Application to rulings.--The Secretary may prescribe the extent, if any, to which any ruling (including any judicial decision or any administrative determination other than by regulation) relating to the internal revenue laws shall be applied without retroactive effect.Page: Previous 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011