- 2 -
February 2, 2000.
The issues for decision are: (1) Whether petitioner is the
prevailing party in the underlying tax case, within the meaning
of section 7430(c)(4). We hold it is not. (2) Whether the
litigation and administrative costs claimed by petitioner are
reasonable, within the meaning of section 7430(c)(1) and (2).
Because of our holding that petitioner is not the prevailing
party, we need not consider whether the costs claimed by
petitioner are reasonable.
Neither party has requested an evidentiary hearing on
petitioner's motion, and the Court concludes that such a hearing
is not necessary for the proper disposition of petitioner's
motion. See Rule 232(a)(2). Accordingly, we decide petitioner's
motion for an award of administrative and litigation costs on the
record of the case, including respondent's objection,
petitioner's response to respondent's objection, and the parties'
1(...continued)
proceedings commenced after July 30, 1996. See TBOR 2 secs.
701(d), 702(b), 703(b), and 704 (b), 110 Stat. 1463-1464. Sec.
7430, as amended by TBOR 2, requires the United States to
establish that the position of the United States was
substantially justified. See sec. 7430(c)(4)(B)(i).
A judicial proceeding is commenced in this Court with the
filing of a petition. See Rule 20(a); Maggie Management Co. v.
Commissioner, 108 T.C. 430, 438 (1997). Petitioner filed its
petition on July 29, 1998; thus, sec. 7430 as amended by TBOR 2
is applicable. Other section references are to the Internal
Revenue Code in effect for the taxable years in issue.
All Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice
and Procedure, unless otherwise indicated.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011