- 5 -
Commissioner, confronted by millions of returns and an economy
which repeatedly must be nourished by quick refunds, must first
pay and then look. This necessity cannot serve as the basis of
an 'estoppel'.'" Gordon v. United States, supra at 1160 (quoting
Warner v. Commissioner, 526 F.2d at 2). The Court, therefore,
must reject petitioners' position on this issue and sustain
respondent.
With respect to petitioners' contention that the interest on
the deficiencies should be abated, section 6404(e)(2) provides:
"The Secretary shall abate the assessment of all interest on any
erroneous refund under section 6602 until the date demand for
repayment is made, unless–-(A) the taxpayer (or a related party)
has in any way caused such erroneous refund, or (B) such
erroneous refund exceeds $50,000."
Without passing upon the question of whether the refund in
this case constitutes an erroneous refund that was caused by
petitioners due to the error in reporting income on their income
tax return, we hold that this Court has no jurisdiction in this
case over an abatement of interest issue arising under section
6404(e). As the Court noted in 508 Clinton St. Corp. v.
Commissioner, 89 T.C. 352, 355 (1987): "Section 6404(e), by its
very terms, does not operate until after there has been an
assessment of interest, which has not yet occurred in this case."
In this case, neither the deficiency nor the interest on the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011