Roger L. and Patricia A. Lavallee - Page 16

                                                - 16 -                                                
            date.  Thus, petitioners had several opportunities to meet with                           
            respondent in order to discuss respondent's proposed adjustments,                         
            as well as to present any additional documentation that they had.                         
            They simply failed to take advantage of the opportunities                                 
            respondent afforded them.13                                                               
                  For the foregoing reasons, we hold that petitioners are not                         
            entitled to an award of reasonable administrative costs.  As a                            
            result of our disposition, we express no opinion as to whether                            
            any of the remaining requirements of section 7430 have been                               

                                                            Decision will be entered                  
                                                      that petitioners are not                        
                                                      entitled to administrative                      

                  13Mr. Conner's letter and most of the documents provided                            
            therein were not submitted until Nov. 23, 1992, more than 2-1/2                           
            years after the notice of deficiency had been issued.  Mr.                                
            Conner's letter also proposed Schedule C deductions for 1985 and                          
            1987 that were in excess of the amounts petitioners had reported                          
            on their returns for those years.                                                         
                  14Respondent also argues that petitioners are seeking costs                         
            incurred in connection with a "collection action", which                                  
            respondent maintains does not constitute an "administrative                               
            proceeding" under sec. 7430(c)(5) and sec. 301.7430-3(a)(4),                              
            Proced. & Admin. Regs.  Since we have found that petitioners have                         
            failed to prove that the position of the United States was not                            
            substantially justified, we leave the resolution of this question                         
            for another day.  See Ball v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1995-520                           
            (also declining to reach this issue).                                                     

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011