- 13 - The record before the Court establishes that petitioner raised the interest abatement issue at his CDP Hearing. With regard to 1997, the carryback year, petitioner argued that the interest accrued prior to the carryback on the amount of the carryback should be eliminated. A taxpayer, however, is liable for interest on a deficiency until the deficiency is paid or otherwise abated. Section 6601(d)(1) provides that a reduction in tax by reason of a carryback of an NOL does not affect the computation of statutory interest due for the period ending with the filing date for the taxable year in which the NOL arose. See also Manning v. Seely Tube & Box Co., 338 U.S. 561, 570 (1950); Med James, Inc. v. Commissioner, 121 T.C. 147, 153 n.9 (2003); Intel Corp. & Consol. Subs. v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 90, 95 (1998). The Court considers petitioner’s request for abatement of the interest for 1997, 1998, and 2000, to be a request for abatement of interest under section 6404, and the Court has jurisdiction under section 6404(i) to consider that request. See Washington v. Commissioner, 120 T.C. 114, 123 n.12 (2003); Katz v. Commissioner, supra at 342-343. The Court concludes that petitioner has failed to prove that respondent abused his discretion in failing to abate interest. Petitioner failed to establish any unreasonable error or delay attributable to respondent in performing a ministerial orPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011