- 12 -
or Collections Division personnel, before issuance of a notice
of deficiency or of the decision of Appeals, are not
substantially justified.
Petitioner contends that the Commissioner, by improperly
failing to issue a notice of deficiency before assessing tax in
excess of the amount shown on the 1984 and 1985 returns, became
liable for an award of administrative costs when the first
collection notice was sent to petitioner. We disagree. There
is no authority in section 7430(c) to award administrative costs
resulting from improper conduct by respondent before one of the
two events stated in section 7430(c)(2) occurs. The United
States is immune from suit except to the extent that it consents
to be sued. United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 586 (1941).
Petitioner relies on Huffman v. Commissioner, 978 F.2d 1139,
1148-1149 (9th Cir. 1992), affg. in part, revg. in part and
remanding T.C. Memo. 1991-144 and Han v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo.
1993-386. These cases are distinguishable from the instant case
because the Commissioner issued a notice of deficiency in both of
those cases.
Petitioner's argument is similar to that made by the
taxpayer in Estate of Gillespie v. Commissioner, 103 T.C. 395,
396-397 (1994). In Estate of Gillespie, respondent issued a 30-
day letter but did not issue a notice of deficiency or notice of
decision by Appeals. We held that a 30-day letter is not a
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011