- 29 -
trials involving substantially the same evidence would have
entailed.
Petitioner has not proven that respondent was not
substantially justified in maintaining respondent's position
against petitioner. In a case such as this, respondent is
charged with the difficult task of protecting the fisc.
Petitioner and Ohanesian asserted fundamentally conflicting
versions of the nature of their relationship and the payments of
the Ohanesian-related items. Based on such evidence, and the
fact that Ohanesian and petitioner both reversed the positions
they took in the State court case, respondent acted reasonably in
maintaining the position taken in petitioner's case until the
Ohanesians conceded with respect to those items.
Petitioner lamely asserts that respondent's agent took an
instant dislike to the Gehans which clouded his judgment as to
the strength of petitioner's position. However, we find no
indication in the record that respondent sought to extract
unjustified concessions from petitioner, or that respondent
pursued the litigation to harass or embarrass petitioner, and
petitioner has pointed to none. See Rutana v. Commissioner, 88
T.C. 1329, 1333 (1987); Wickert v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-
277, affd. 842 F.2d 1005 (8th Cir. 1988).
Since we hold that petitioner has not proven that
respondent's position was not substantially justified with
respect to the deductibility of the Ohanesian-related items, we
Page: Previous 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011