- 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.
7430(c)(4)(A)(iii).
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