- 12 - However, we can find no evidence in the administrative record of any error or delay in the preparation of a report. Petitioner also alleges that there was an unreasonable error or delay in “the time [the case] was in the Appeals division and transferred to the Miami Office and then back to Tampa.” However, we can find no evidence in the administrative record that petitioner’s case was ever transferred to the Miami Appeals Office. We conclude that petitioner has failed to show that any of respondent’s employees or officers committed an unreasonable error or delay in performing ministerial or managerial acts. Accordingly, we hold that respondent’s denial of petitioner’s request for interest abatement was not arbitrary, capricious, or without sound basis in fact or law, and we uphold respondent’s final determination not to abate interest. In reaching all of our holdings herein, we have considered all arguments made by the parties, and to the extent not mentioned above, we find them to be irrelevant, moot or without merit. To reflect the foregoing, Decision will be entered for respondent.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12Last modified: March 27, 2008