Gerald R. Weiss - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         

               Before payment, petitioner filed a Claim for Refund and                
          Request for Abatement in March 1997.  In it, he requested an                
          abatement of interest for the period from November 1, 1991, to              
          March 21, 1997, in the amount of $864.56.  This period                      
          corresponds to the time between which petitioner wrote the 1991             
          letter and filed his 1997 request for abatement.  In support of             
          his claim, petitioner stated that he tried to stop the accrual of           
          interest when he sent the October 1991 letter.                              
               Respondent reviewed petitioner’s request and disallowed his            
          claim for abatement of interest, stating that there were no                 
          “errors or delays that merit abatement of interest in our review            
          of available records and other information for the period from              
          11/1/91 to 3/21/97.”  Petitioner asks us to review respondent’s             
          failure to abate interest for an abuse of discretion.                       
                                       OPINION                                        
               The Commissioner’s power to abate an assessment of interest            
          involves the exercise of discretion.  See Lee v. Commissioner,              
          113 T.C. 145 (1999).  Though we shall give the Commissioner’s               
          decision some deference, we have the authority to determine                 
          whether the Commissioner’s failure to abate interest was an abuse           
          of that discretion.  See sec. 6404(i); Lee v. Commissioner,                 
          supra.  A taxpayer will be given an abatement only if he or she             
          can prove that the Commissioner exercised this discretion                   
          arbitrarily, capriciously, or without sound basis in fact or law.           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011