Bradley K. Morrison - Page 2

                                        - 2 -                                         
          for an evidentiary hearing on this matter.  See Rule 232(a)(2).             
          Accordingly, we rule on petitioner’s motion on the basis of the             
          parties’ submissions and the existing record.  See Rule                     
          232(a)(1).  The portions of our opinion on the merits in the                
          instant case, Morrison v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2005-53                  
          (Morrison), that are relevant to our disposition of this motion             
          are incorporated herein by this reference.                                  
               After concessions2, the issues for decision are: (1) Whether           
          petitioner paid or incurred any attorney’s fees; (2) whether                
          respondent was substantially justified in his position before               
          petitioner made his qualified offer; (3) whether petitioner                 
          unreasonably protracted the proceedings; and (4) whether the                
          costs claimed are reasonable.                                               
                                     Background                                       
               Respondent issued a notice of deficiency to petitioner on              
          July 24, 2003, determining the following deficiencies in and                
          accuracy-related penalty on petitioner’s Federal income taxes:              
                                    Penalty                                           
               Year      Deficiency     Sec. 6662(a)                                  
               1999      $87,780       $17,556                                        
               2000      4,075          –-                                            




               2  Respondent concedes that petitioner qualifies as a                  
          prevailing party based on the qualified offer made on or about              
          Apr. 5, 2004, meets the net worth requirement, and exhausted all            
          administrative remedies.                                                    





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011