- 2 -
decide is whether petitioner was the prevailing party. For the
reasons stated below, we deny petitioner’s motion for reasonable
costs.
Background
At the time of filing the petition in the instant case,
petitioner resided in Smyrna, Delaware. Vanya Tyrrell (Mrs.
Tyrrell) prepared petitioner’s 2003 Form 1040, U.S. Individual
Income Tax Return (tax return).3
In the spring of 2005, respondent sent a letter to
petitioner requesting that he submit documentation to support
certain deductions claimed on his 2003 tax return. This was the
initial contact letter and did not provide petitioner an
opportunity for administrative review with respondent’s Office of
Appeals. Petitioner did not respond with the requested
documentation. Instead, petitioner’s attorney, Lowell E. Mann
(Mr. Mann), sent a letter protesting respondent’s proposed
1(...continued)
costs includes both administrative and litigation costs. We
treat petitioner’s motion as a motion for both administrative and
litigation costs.
2Unless otherwise indicated, all Rule references are to the
Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, and all section
references are to the Internal Revenue Code, as amended.
3Petitioner’s tax return was one of approximately 175 tax
returns that were prepared by Vanya Tyrrell and chosen for
examination by respondent’s Correspondence Examination Unit. All
such cases involve similar unsubstantiated deductions. Lowell E.
Mann represents the petitioners in all such cases and has filed
virtually identical petitions for each such case.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011