- 2 -
decide is whether petitioners were the prevailing party. For the
reasons stated below, we deny petitioners’ motion for reasonable
costs.
Background
At the time of filing the petition in the instant case,
petitioners resided in Roebling, New Jersey. Vanya Tyrrell (Mrs.
Tyrrell) prepared petitioners’ 2003 Form 1040, U.S. Individual
Income Tax Return (tax return).3
In the spring of 2005, respondent sent a letter to
petitioners requesting that they submit documentation to support
certain deductions claimed on their 2003 tax return. This was
the initial contact letter and did not provide petitioners with
an opportunity for administrative review with respondent’s Office
of Appeals. Petitioners did not respond with the requested
documentation. Instead, petitioners’ attorney, Lowell E. Mann
(Mr. Mann), sent a letter protesting respondent’s proposed
1(...continued)
treat petitioners’ 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.
3Petitioners’ 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