- 7 -
was an abuse of the Commissioner's discretion, which is a
question of fact. See Estate of Gardner v. Commissioner, 82 T.C.
989, 1000 (1984).
In this case, petitioner's position principally relates to
the third possible basis for abatement under section 6404(a);
i.e.; an erroneous assessment of interest. Petitioner makes no
allegation that the interest was computed incorrectly because of
a mathematical or mechanical error. Rather, petitioner’s claim
for abatement relates only to interest that has “erroneously”
accrued on assessments that petitioner claims have already been
paid.
Petitioner claims: (1) That she has been making payments
toward her 1988 and 1990 tax liabilities since 1994; (2) that
respondent has been withholding refunds from her subsequent tax
years and that a portion of those refunds should have been
applied to her 1988 and 1990 tax liabilities thereby serving to
reduce the same; and (3) that respondent has erroneously denied
her earned income credit for subsequent tax years. As a result
of these factors petitioner concludes that her assessed
liabilities, together with any applicable interest, have been
paid.
Petitioner failed to produce probative evidence that she
made any payments towards the balance due on her accounts for
1988 and 1990. Petitioner presented a canceled check in the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011