- 5 -
that “if the IRS had not taken such an unreasonable position in
the beginning of the audit, then the delays on their part would
have been drastically reduced”. The mere passage of time,
however, does not establish that the Commissioner has erred or
delayed in performing a ministerial act. See Lee v.
Commissioner, 113 T.C. 145, 150 (1999). Similarly, the actions
of respondent’s agents in applying Federal tax law to
petitioner’s facts and circumstances required the exercise of
judgment and discretion and so did not constitute ministerial
actions that could provide a basis for abating interest. See
sec. 301.6404-2T(b)(1), Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 52 Fed.
Reg. 30163 (Aug. 13, 1987).
At trial, petitioner’s certified public accountant, Gary
Fyffe (Fyffe), testified that on several occasions he requested,
on petitioner’s behalf, a meeting with the revenue agent’s group
manager to discuss the revenue agent’s proposed adjustments.
Fyffe testified that “basically I was told that * * * I wasn’t
going to get the meeting for different reasons, but * * * the
reason I remember most was for some reason she wasn’t available.”
Having failed to obtain a meeting with the group manager,
petitioner requested and received an Appeals conference. Fyffe
opined that because the salvage value used by the revenue agent
was “flawed”, petitioner “would have probably been a little more
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011