- 17 -
additions to tax) on account of the burden of production imposed
on the Secretary by current section 7491(c) (hereafter section
7491(c).5 As will be discussed, respondent has carried that
burden.
B. Summary Adjudication Unnecessary
Respondent has moved for partial summary judgment in his
favor with respect to the remaining additions to tax.
Petitioners object, respectively, to those motions (collectively,
the summary judgment motions).
A party may move for “summary adjudication in the moving
party’s favor upon all or any part of the legal issues in
controversy.” Rule 121(a). “Summary judgment is a device used
to expedite litigation and is intended to avoid unnecessary and
expensive trials of ‘phantom factual questions.’” Espinoza v.
Commissioner, 78 T.C. 412, 416 (1982). “The party moving for
summary judgment has the burden of showing the absence of a
genuine issue as to any material fact.” Id.; see Rule 121(b).
“The opposing party is to be afforded the benefit of all
reasonable doubt, and any inference to be drawn from the
underlying facts contained in the record must be viewed in a
light most favorable to the party opposing the motion for summary
judgment.” Espinoza v. Commissioner, supra at 416.
5 We do not decide whether respondent was required to
satisfy sec. 7491(c) in this default setting.
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011