- 5 -
Generally, we may dismiss a petition for failure to state a claim
upon respondent’s motion when it appears beyond doubt that
petitioners can prove no set of facts in support of their claim
which would entitle them to relief. See Conley v. Gibson, 355
U.S. 41, 45-46 (1957); Price v. Moody, 677 F.2d 676, 677 (8th
Cir. 1982); Boyce v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-439, affd. 122
F.3d 1069 (9th Cir. 1997); Arredondo v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1996-185.
Section 6404(g) (redesignated as subsection 6404(i)),
enacted by section 302(a) of the Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2
(TBOR2), Pub. L. 104-168, 110 Stat. 1457 (1996), provides the Tax
Court with authority to review the Commissioner’s denial of a
taxpayer’s request for abatement of interest. The Tax Court has
jurisdiction to review whether the Commissioner’s refusal to
abate interest was an abuse of discretion. See sec. 6404(i)(1).
Petitioners’ request for abatement of interest is based upon
section 6404(e)(1). Section 6404(e)(1) provides that the
Commissioner may abate interest attributable to unreasonable
error or delay by an officer or employee of the Internal Revenue
Service in performing a ministerial act.3 Section 6404(e) was
3 In 1996, sec. 6404(e) was amended under sec. 301 of
TBOR2, Pub. L. 104-168, 110 Stat. 1457 (1996), to permit the
Commissioner to abate interest with respect to an “unreasonable”
error or delay resulting from “managerial” and ministerial acts.
This amendment, however, applies to interest accruing with
respect to deficiencies or payments for tax years beginning after
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011