William C. Eberhardt, Jr. and Susan A. Eberhardt - Page 17

                                       - 16 -                                         
          2003-346; Crisan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-318; Willis v.            
          Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2003-302.  Accordingly, collection by              
          levy of petitioners' unpaid 1995 tax liability reflected in the             
          Notice of Determination may proceed.                                        
          B.  Abatement of Interest                                                   
               If, as part of a section 6330 hearing, a taxpayer makes a              
          request for abatement of interest, the Court has jurisdiction               
          over the request for abatement of interest that is the subject of           
          the Commissioner's collection activities.  Katz v. Commissioner,            
          115 T.C. at 340-341.                                                        
               This Court may order an abatement of interest only if there            
          is an abuse of discretion by the Commissioner in failing to abate           
          interest.  See sec. 6404(i) (formerly sec. 6404(g)).  In order to           
          demonstrate an abuse of discretion, a taxpayer must prove that              
          the Commissioner exercised his discretion arbitrarily,                      
          capriciously, or without sound basis in fact or law.  See Rule              
          142(a); Lee v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. 145, 149 (1999); Woodral v.           
          Commissioner, 112 T.C. at 23.                                               
















Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011