- 22 -
Section 530 only through the June 8, 2001, notice of
determination, which postdated by a substantial margin the
commencement on August 6, 1999, of the underlying employment tax
audit. Petitioner then states:
the inaction of Respondent in not providing the
required notice to Petitioner is a serious
Constitutional violation of due process, and Petitioner
moves this Court to allow Petitioner to recover its
legal fees, since the conduct of the Respondent is so
egregious in this matter.
To the extent that petitioner’s due process contentions take
the form of a claim for litigation or administrative costs and
fees under section 7430, such claim is premature. Rule
231(a)(2), as pertinent here, specifies that the appropriate time
to seek recovery of legal costs follows service of a written
opinion. See McWilliams v. Commissioner, 104 T.C. 320, 327
(1995); Groetzinger v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 533, 548 (1986).
Furthermore, even if petitioner’s allegations might be read
as a plea encompassing other remedies, petitioner has failed to
show that its situation satisfies the prerequisites for relief
under the Due Process Clause. As this Court has noted, even in a
criminal context defendants are generally required to establish
actual prejudice in order to obtain due process relief. Riland
v. Commissioner, 79 T.C. 185, 197-198 (1982) (involving a claimed
denial of due process on account of delay in issuance of the
subject deficiency notice). The record in the instant case is
devoid of evidence of such prejudice. Although petitioner was
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011