- 15 -
during his review of the interest abatement request and did not
comply with the requests of the Appeals officer with whom Ohrtman
was coordinating the case. They did not provide the letter on
which petitioner claims reliance. Thus, the Appeals officer and
Ohrtman relied on the information that remained in petitioner’s
file after the destruction of the World Trade Center. Nothing in
Sullivan’s trial testimony supported petitioner’s arguments, and
the failure to contact her would not have affected the
determination.
We have considered petitioner’s other arguments. They are
unpersuasive. We therefore uphold respondent’s determination not
to abate interest in this case.
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order
and decision will be entered.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Last modified: May 25, 2011