- 2 -
favor of P. P and Mr. and Mrs. O took positions in the
State court litigation which were contrary to the
positions each took in this case. To avoid whipsaw, R
took inconsistent positions against P and Mr. and Mrs.
O. When Mr. and Mrs. O conceded the principal issue in
their case, R conceded the issue in P's case.
Thereafter, P filed a motion to recover administrative
and litigation costs pursuant to sec. 7430, I.R.C.
1. Held: Because P commenced its case (by filing
a petition for redetermination) before the enactment of
TBR2, P bears the burden of proving that R's position
was not substantially justified.
2. Held, further, P failed to carry its burden of
proof that R's administrative and litigation position
was not substantially justified, and is therefore not
entitled to an award of reasonable administrative and
litigation costs.
Alec Valk, Terrence J. Moore, and Joseph E. Mudd, for
petitioner.
Lisa N. Primavera, for respondent.
OPINION
NIMS, Judge: This matter is before the Court on
petitioner's Motion for an Award of Reasonable Litigation and
Administrative Costs (motion for costs) filed pursuant to Rule
231 and section 7430 on January 2, 1997. Unless otherwise
indicated, all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of
Practice and Procedure. All section references are to sections
of the Internal Revenue Code in effect at the time the petition
was filed.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011