Wayne and Lois Hampton - Page 4




                                        - 4 -                                         
          settlement on all of the remaining adjustments set forth in                 
          respondent’s notice of deficiency.                                          
               On February 11, 2002, petitioners filed under section                  
          7430(a) their motion for an award of $12,339 in litigation costs.           

                                       OPINION                                        
               Respondent acknowledges that petitioners substantially                 
          prevailed with respect to the adjustments set forth in                      
          respondent’s notice of deficiency, that petitioners met the net             
          worth requirement, that petitioners exhausted available                     
          administrative remedies, and that the $12,339 in claimed                    
          litigation costs is reasonable.  See sec. 7430(c)(4), (b)(1),               
          (c)(1), (2), and (3).  Respondent contends, however, that                   
          petitioners unreasonably protracted the administrative and court            
          proceedings herein and that respondent’s position was                       
          substantially justified.  See sec. 7430(b)(3) and (4).                      
               Petitioners emphasize that they seek recovery only of                  
          litigation costs incurred after respondent mailed the notice of             
          deficiency (namely, of litigation costs incurred after                      
          December 7, 2000), and not administrative costs incurred during             
          the audit examination and Appeals protest when their delay in               
          producing records to respondent may have delayed the resolution             
          of the adjustments.                                                         
               In connection with the audit, appeals, and litigation of               
          this case (from December 27, 1996, to February 2002), petitioners           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011