- 4 -
If you do not accept our findings, we recommend
that you request a conference with our Appeals Office.
The Letter 569(DO) further states that a review of petitioners'
file indicates that there was no delay due to a ministerial act
of an Internal Revenue Service employee that would allow for an
abatement of interest pursuant to section 6404(e).
On May 26, 1998, respondent filed a motion to dismiss this
case for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that, at the time
that the petition was filed, respondent had not made a final
determination to deny petitioners' request for abatement of
interest. Petitioners in turn filed an opposition to
respondent's motion to dismiss asserting that the Court should
exercise its jurisdiction in this case under section 6404(g) on
the ground that respondent unreasonably delayed providing
petitioners with a response to their request for abatement of
interest. Relying on a similar procedure established with
respect to refund claims under section 6532(a), petitioners
contend that, where respondent does not respond to a request for
abatement of interest within 6 months of the filing of such
request, the Court should treat respondent's inaction as a final
determination to deny the request for purposes of the Court's
jurisdiction under section 6404(g).
This matter was called for hearing at the Court's motions
session in Washington, D.C. Counsel for both parties appeared at
the hearing and presented argument with respect to the pending
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011