- 7 -
Section 6404(g) clearly grants the Court jurisdiction to
review the Commissioner's failure to abate interest under all
subsections of section 6404 and does not limit the Court's
jurisdiction to review cases arising only under section 6404(e).
Respondent, on brief, acknowledges that the language of section
6404(g) does not specifically limit the Court's jurisdiction to
the review of denials of claims for abatement brought under
section 6404(e) but argues that the legislative history
demonstrates that it was the intent of Congress to impose such a
limit on the Court's jurisdiction.
Respondent's argument fails. The language of the statute is
clear; therefore, we do not look to the legislative history to
determine the statute's meaning.5 See Sullivan v. Stroop, supra;
United States v. Ron Pair Enters., Inc., supra at 241-242; see
also Blum v. Stenson, supra; United States v. Lewis, supra.
Respondent's interpretation of section 6404(g) is contrary
to the clear language of the statute. We reject respondent's
contention that we lack jurisdiction to review the denial of
petitioners' request for abatement of interest to the extent
their claim arises under section 6404(a). In light of
petitioners' timely petition for review, we hold that petitioners
5 Even if we were to look at the legislative history,
however, it does not contradict the language of the statute.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011