- 18 -
date Asher’s TMP signed it, July 9, 1997. Without more
information about when Asher’s TMP received the closing
agreement, or when Ms. Sullivan sent it out, we cannot find that
there was a delay by respondent in performing a ministerial act,
since the additional delay in this instance was likely the result
of the problem with the nonconsenting Wilshire partner’s
acceptance and the eventual failure of Ms. Sullivan’s settlement
strategy. Therefore, it was not an abuse of discretion for
respondent’s Appeals officer to deny interest abatement for the
period October 1993 through July 9, 1997.
D. December 11, 1998, Through August 1, 1999
After the Asher closing agreement was countersigned,
respondent adjusted petitioner’s 1983 and 1984 returns according
to the terms of the closing agreement and, on August 20, 1999,
issued petitioner the notice of adjustment. Respondent followed
regular IRS procedures in the processing of petitioner’s notice
of adjustment, and there is no evidence that respondent was
dilatory in performing a ministerial act during this period. We
conclude that it was not an abuse of discretion for respondent to
deny petitioner’s request for interest abatement for the period
December 11, 1998, through August 1, 1999.
Decision will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Last modified: May 25, 2011