Robert A. Franklin - Page 12




                                       - 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  12

Last modified: March 27, 2008