- 8 -
Commissioner’s failure to abate interest under section 6404 was
an abuse of discretion. See sec. 6404(g)(1); Woodral v.
Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 23 (1999). Section 6404 does not
authorize the Treasury Secretary to abate assessments of taxes
and does not confer jurisdiction on this Court to review the
denial of such requests.
Petitioners cannot point to, nor does the record credibly
suggest, any erroneous or dilatory performance of a ministerial
act by an officer or employee of the Commissioner that
contributed to a delay or error in the payment of the interest
which has accrued on petitioners’ outstanding tax liabilities.
Cf. Douponce v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1999-398.
Petitioners argue generally that respondent’s agent
improperly performed the examination of their tax returns, that
respondent’s determinations in the statutory notice were
improper, and that the Appeals officer gave inadequate
consideration to their protest. The actions of respondent’s
agent and Appeals officer in applying Federal tax law to
petitioners’ facts and circumstances required the exercise of
discretion and judgment. A decision concerning the proper
application of Federal tax law is not a ministerial act, see
sec. 301.6404-2T(b)(1), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 52 Fed.
Reg. 310163 (Aug. 13, 1987), and hence cannot provide a basis for
abating interest under section 6404(e).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011