- 10 -
income tax liability, and he issued a notice of deficiency
reflecting his determination before the period of limitations for
assessment provided by the Internal Revenue Code had expired.
Each of these adjustments required respondent to apply Federal
income tax law to facts that petitioners provided. None of
respondent’s adjustments to petitioners’ 2000 return constituted
a ministerial or managerial act within the meaning of section
6404(e).
In this case it was petitioners’ own mistakes that caused
the delay in correctly calculating petitioners’ 2000 income tax
liability. Section 6404(e) permits an abatement of interest only
when the interest is not attributable to error or delay by the
taxpayers. Moreover, most of petitioners’ argument is directed
to respondent’s perceived delay in identifying petitioners’
mistakes and correcting them. However, section 6404(e) does not
authorize the abatement of interest from the due date of the
return until the Commissioner contacts a taxpayer in writing with
respect to the deficiency. In this case respondent did not
contact petitioner in writing with respect to the 2000 income tax
deficiency until April 22, 2002. Respondent’s failure to abate
interest from the date petitioners’ return was filed to April 22,
2002, was not, and under section 6404(e) cannot be, an abuse of
discretion. See sec. 6404(e); Donovan v. Commissioner, supra; H.
Rept. 99-246, supra at 844, 1986-3 C.B. (Vol. 2) at 844.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011