- 5 - humiliating and arduous experience for * * * [her] * * * and [her] husband.” Petitioner also points out that the proposed deficiencies started at $1,727 for 1992 and $9,550 for 1993 and ended in agreed amounts of zero for 1992 and $315 for 1993. In that regard, however, respondent does not question whether petitioner is entitled to administrative costs. Respondent agrees that petitioner is entitled to such costs, but only to the amount incurred from the time of the issuance of the notice of deficiency.2 Petitioner contends that sections 301.7430-2(a) and (b) and 301.7430-3(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs., provide a basis for allowance of the costs (accountant’s fees) that respondent has declined to permit. Petitioner contends that those procedural regulations provide the Court with authority to grant reasonable costs to petitioner, including the amount that was incurred prior to respondent’s issuance of the notice of deficiency. Section 301.7430-2(a) and (b), Proced. & Admin. Regs., sets forth the requirements and procedures for recovery of reasonable administrative costs. In particular, section 301.7430-2(a), Proced. & Admin. Regs., is introductory and generally describes the contents of the regulation. 2 There is no mention here of notice’s of decision being issued by the Appeals Office.Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011