- 7 -
different outcome. The Commissioner's refusal to abate the
interest on interest after all of petitioner's liability for tax
and penalties had been satisfied is an abuse of discretion.
Petitioner asked an employee of respondent what the "total amount
due" was for 1988, 1990, and 1991. Respondent’s employee told
petitioner the total amount due, and petitioner promptly paid
those amounts. However, the employee did not include all of the
accrued but unassessed interest in the amounts given to
petitioner. Petitioner promptly discharged his liability for
interest when he was notified of it on November 4, 1996. It is
reasonable to assume the only reason for the delay of in excess
of 5 months was caused by respondent's failure to tell petitioner
the correct amounts due when petitioner requested that
information on May 9, 1996. Respondent acknowledges on brief
"that, under some circumstances, giving an incorrect payout
figure may constitute a ministerial act and respondent may abate
interest attributable to that act." In the circumstances of this
case, the Commissioner should have abated the interest on unpaid
interest that accrued for the period from May 30 to the date on
which petitioner made full payment. Respondent’s failure to do
so was an abuse of discretion.
Decision will be entered
pursuant to the foregoing.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011