- 6 -
The dispute here comes down to a question whether Ms. Ogle
reached an agreement with petitioner for settlement of his tax
obligations concerning 1995 and 1996 for $14,172. The documents
and materials presented by petitioner indicate that he proposed a
settlement. There is no evidence that Ms. Ogle agreed to the
settlement except petitioner’s unsupported testimony and
argument. Petitioner’s explanation of his reason for failing to
obtain written evidence of his alleged settlement agreement is
unconvincing. On this record we conclude that Ms. Ogle did not
agree with petitioner on a settlement figure, although petitioner
may have made such a proposal. Consequently we agree with
respondent that because petitioner caused the delay in the
payment of the correct amount, he is not entitled to abatement of
interest under section 6404(e). We conclude that petitioner has
had a fair hearing on the issues presented in the previous case
and in this case on remand and that respondent’s determination as
set forth in the Supplemental Notice was not an abuse of
discretion.
Reviewed and adopted as the report of the Small Tax Case
Division.
Decision will be entered
for respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Last modified: May 25, 2011