rys ler ▁Cor p . ▁v . ▁Brown , ▁specifically ▁referred ▁to ▁the ▁Re venue ▁Act ▁of ▁ 1 8 6 2 , ▁the ▁" Act ▁of ▁July ▁ 1 , ▁ 1 8 6 2 , ▁ch . ▁ 1 1 9 , ▁ 1 2 ▁Stat . ▁ 4 3 2 , ▁the ▁stat ute ▁to ▁which ▁the ▁present ▁In ternal ▁Re venue ▁Service ▁can ▁be ▁trac ed ". ▁( The ▁ 1 8 6 2 ▁Act ▁created ▁the ▁office ▁of ▁Commission er ▁of ▁In ternal ▁Re venue .) ▁ ▁Due ▁to ▁the ▁doctrine ▁of ▁so ver eign ▁imm unity , ▁the ▁I RS ▁itself ▁( al ong ▁with ▁many ▁other ▁Federal ▁ag encies ) ▁does ▁not , ▁as ▁a ▁general ▁rule , ▁have ▁the ▁capacity ▁to ▁" s ue ▁and ▁be ▁su ed " ▁-- ▁a ▁concept ▁separate ▁from ▁that ▁of ▁whether ▁the ▁I RS ▁is ▁a ▁U . S . ▁" g overn ment ▁ag ency ." ▁See , ▁for ▁example , ▁Thompson ▁v . ▁Department ▁of ▁Tre as ury , ▁In ternal ▁Re venue ▁Service ▁and ▁United ▁States ▁of ▁America , ▁where ▁the ▁court ▁stated ▁that ▁the ▁" Dep art ment ▁of ▁the ▁Tre as ury " ▁and ▁" Internal ▁Re venue ▁Service " ▁are ▁" f eder al ▁ag encies ▁within ▁the ▁United ▁States ▁Government . ▁Federal ▁ag encies ▁may ▁not ▁be ▁su ed ▁in ▁their ▁own ▁name ▁except ▁to ▁the ▁extent ▁Congress ▁may ▁specifically ▁allow ▁such ▁su its ". ▁Also , ▁" C ong ress ▁has