Robert A. Franklin - Page 7




                                        - 7 -                                         
          Appeals Office received the file.  On August 5, 2003, the                   
          assessment date was entered into the IRS’s computer system.                 
               On August 25, 2003, the IRS assessed deficiencies in                   
          petitioner’s income tax, with interest, as follows:  For 1998,              
          a deficiency of $2,308 and $833.54 of accrued interest (interest            
          calculated from April 16, 1999, to August 25, 2003); for 1999,              
          a deficiency of $26,916 and $6,885.15 of accrued interest                   
          (interest calculated from April 16, 2000, to August 25, 2003);              
          for 2000, a deficiency of $34,328 and $4,948.79 of accrued                  
          interest (interest calculated from April 16, 2001, to August 25,            
          2003).                                                                      
               On September 22, 2003, petitioner filed Form 843, Claim for            
          Refund and Request for Abatement.  Petitioner requested interest            
          abatement as follows:  For 1998, $312.55 of interest abatement;             
          for 1999, $3,430.19 of interest abatement; and for 2000,                    
          $3,648.65 of interest abatement.  Subsequently, the IRS sent                
          petitioner a letter stating that petitioner’s request for                   
          interest abatement had been forwarded to respondent’s Memphis               
          Office for review.                                                          
               After assignment of the request for interest abatement to              
          Revenue Agent Susan Harbin (Agent Harbin) in Jacksonville,                  
          Florida, on September 29, 2004, Agent Harbin suspended the                  
          interest which had accrued during a portion of the examination              
          and otherwise proposed to deny petitioner’s request for interest            







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  Next 

Last modified: March 27, 2008