- 9 -
deficiency case. She also stated that it was possible that
petitioner raised the issue of interest abatement at the section
6330 hearing.
We conclude that petitioner raised the issue of interest
abatement at the section 6330 hearing.
B. Is Petitioner Entitled to Interest Abatement?
Section 6404(e)(1) provides, in pertinent part, that the
Commissioner may abate the assessment of interest on any
deficiency if the interest is attributable to any error or delay
by an officer or employee of the IRS (acting in his official
capacity) in performing a ministerial act.5 Woodral v.
Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 24-25 (1999). A ministerial act means
a procedural or mechanical act that does not involve the exercise
of judgment. Lee v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. 145 (1999); Donovan
v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2000-220.
This Court may order abatement where the Commissioner abuses
his discretion by failing to abate interest. Sec. 6404(h)(1).
In order to prevail, a taxpayer must prove that the Commissioner
5 In 1996, sec. 6404(e) was amended under sec. 301 of the
Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2, Pub. L. 104-168, 110 Stat. 1452, 1457
(1996), to permit the Commissioner to abate interest with respect
to an “unreasonable” error or delay resulting from “managerial”
and ministerial acts. The new provision applies to interest
accruing with respect to deficiencies or payments for tax years
beginning after July 30, 1996; therefore, it is not applicable to
the case at bar. Woodral v. Commissioner, 112 T.C. 19, 25 n.8
(1999).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011