Amilu S. Rothhammer, formerly Amilu S. Martin - Page 9

                                        - 9 -                                         
          Court of jurisdiction.  See, e.g., Secunda v. Commissioner, T.C.            
          Memo. 1977-185.                                                             
               Martin contends that Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C.             
          142 (1988); and Estate of DuPuy v. Commissioner, 48 T.C. 918                
          (1967), establish that we lack jurisdiction.  We disagree.  In              
          those cases, after the 90-day period for filing a petition                  
          expired, motions were filed to amend the petitions to contest               
          deficiencies for taxpayers or tax years omitted from the original           
          petitions.  The instant case is distinguishable because, here,              
          the petition stated that Martin contested the deficiency that               
          resulted from his and Rothhammer’s investment in                            
          Elektra/Hemisphere, which was the same deficiency described in              
          the notice of deficiency sent to Rothhammer and attached to the             
          original petition.  We conclude that neither Rule 34(b)(8) nor              
          the cases cited by Martin establish that respondent’s position              
          was not substantially justified because a copy of the notice of             
          deficiency sent to him was not attached to the petition.                    
               4.   Conclusion                                                        
               Respondent had a reasonable basis in law and fact for the              
          position that Martin authorized Berg to sign and file the                   
          petition on his behalf when respondent filed the answer and                 
          throughout the judicial proceeding.6                                        

               6  We need not decide whether the number of hours billed by            
          Martin’s counsel and accountant and Martin’s other litigation               

Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011