- 2 -
MEMORANDUM OPINION
CHABOT, Judge: This matter is before us on petitioners’
motion for an award of litigation costs1 pursuant to section
74302 and Rule 231.3
The issue for decision is whether respondent’s position in
the instant case was substantially justified, within the meaning
of section 7430(c)(4)(B)(i).
Neither side has requested a hearing, and we conclude that a
hearing is not necessary. Rule 232(a). Accordingly, we decide
petitioners’ motion on the basis of the parties’ stipulations,
stipulated exhibits, and briefs filed in connection with
petitioners’ motion, and the other documents in the Court’s
record in the instant case.
1 Although petitioners refer to “administrative” costs at
a few places in their brief, it is evident from the language in
their motion and from the exhibit describing their counsel’s work
that their motion does not deal with costs paid or incurred
before their counsel began to work on the petition herein. From
the foregoing, we conclude that petitioners’ references to
administrative costs are inadvertent and that our proceedings
relate only to litigation costs.
2 Unless indicated otherwise, all section references are
to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as in effect
for the years in issue. References to sec. 7430 are to that
section as in effect for proceedings commenced at the time the
petition in the instant case was filed. Because the petition was
filed on Sept. 26, 1996, the amendments made by title VII of the
Taxpayer Bill of Rights 2, Pub. L. 104-168, sec. 701, 110 Stat.
1452, 1463 (1996), effective after July 30, 1996, apply to the
instant case. See Maggie Management Co. v. Commissioner, 108
T.C. 430, 438-441 (1997).
3 Unless indicated otherwise, all Rule references are to
the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
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