Glen L. Wittstadt, Jr. and Lynne M. Wittstadt - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                          
               Rules 180, 181, and 183.1  The Court agrees with and adopts             
          the Opinion of the Special Trial Judge, which is set forth below.            
                          OPINION OF THE SPECIAL TRIAL JUDGE                           
               ARMEN, Special Trial Judge:  This case is before the Court              
          on petitioners' Motion for Costs, as amended, filed pursuant to              
          section 7430 and Rule 231.2  Petitioners seek to recover                     
          approximately $16,000 incurred in resisting respondent's                     
          deficiency determinations for the taxable year 1989.                         
               After concessions by respondent,3 the issues for decision               
          are as follows:                                                              
               (1) Whether respondent's position in the proceedings was                
          substantially justified; and, if not,                                        

               1    Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are             
          to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for 1989, the taxable year            
          in issue.  However, all references to section 7430 are to such               
          section in effect at the time that the petition was filed.                   
          Unless otherwise indicated, all Rule references are to the Tax               
          Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.                                       
               2    Also pending before the Court is petitioners' Motion               
          for Entry of Decision.  However, at the hearing on that motion,              
          the parties agreed that there is an overpayment in petitioners'              
          Federal income tax for 1989 in the amount of $50,808.78, which               
          amount, as well as interest thereon, has been refunded to                    
          petitioners.  Accordingly, we need not address petitioners'                  
          Motion for Entry of Decision in this memorandum opinion.                     
               3    Respondent concedes: (1) Petitioners exhausted their               
          administrative remedies, see sec. 7430(b)(1); (2) petitioners did            
          not unreasonably protract the court proceeding, see sec.                     
          7430(b)(4); (3) petitioners substantially prevailed in the court             
          proceeding, see sec. 7430(c)(4)(A)(ii); and (4) petitioners                  
          satisfy the applicable net worth requirement, see sec.                       

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