- 14 -
“ministerial act” must involve an act “that occurs during the
processing of a taxpayer’s case after all prerequisites to the
act, such as conferences and review by supervisors, have taken
place.” Sec. 301.6404-2T(b)(1), Temporary Proced. & Admin.
Regs., supra. It is clear that a decision to not extend a
settlement offer to petitioners at a particular stage of an
ongoing examination involving the returns of as many as 100
partners was not a ministerial act. The IRS was far from
completing the prerequisite acts in late 1991 and early 1992 when
petitioners requested a settlement.
Second, petitioners argue that delays were caused by
respondent’s failure to process the amended returns which showed
refunds. There was no ministerial error in this situation
either, because employees of the IRS exercised discretion in not
processing all of petitioners’ amended returns: They assessed
the taxes shown as due on the returns, see sec. 6201(a)(1), and
they did not process those returns showing refunds because the
taxable years in issue were subject to an ongoing examination at
the partnership level.
Finally, petitioners argue that delays were caused by
respondent’s failure to use the most current and accurate
information in making final settlement calculations. Petitioners
argue that this failure was due to (a) an IRS employee, Marilyn
Parsonson, writing reports indicating the amount of tax due on
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011