Nellwyn A. Buck - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
          Commissioner, 861 F.2d 131, 134-35 (5th Cir. 1988), affg. 89 T.C.           
          79 (1987).                                                                  
               In deciding whether the Commissioner's position was                    
          substantially justified, the Court will consider not only the               
          basis of the Commissioner's legal position, but also the manner             
          in which the Commissioner maintained that position.  Wasie v.               
          Commissioner, 86 T.C. 962, 969 (1986).  In assessing the                    
          Commissioner's position in each of the proceedings, we may                  
          consider, inter alia, whether the Commissioner used the costs and           
          expenses of litigation to extract unjustified concessions from              
          the taxpayer, whether the Commissioner pursued litigation to                
          harass or embarrass the taxpayer, or whether the Commissioner's             
          pursuit of the litigation was politically motivated.  Rutana v.             
          Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1329, 1333 (1987); DeVenney v.                        
          Commissioner, 85 T.C. 927, 930 (1985).                                      
               In the present case, respondent's position, both at the time           
          she issued the notice of deficiency and at the time she filed the           
          answer, was that petitioner was liable for a deficiency in income           
          tax and additions to tax for 1988.  It is respondent's agreement            
          that petitioner paid her total income tax liability for 1988 in             
          April 1989 that forms the basis of petitioner's claim for                   
          administrative and litigation costs.  In other words, petitioner            
          posits that she is a prevailing party within the meaning of                 
          section 7430 on the ground that respondent's position was not               
          substantially justified, either at the time the notice of                   




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011