- 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 West New York, New Jersey. Vanya Tyrrell
(Mrs. Tyrrell) prepared petitioners’ 2003 Form 1040, U.S.
Individual Income Tax Return (tax return).3
On April 29, 2005, respondent sent a letter to petitioners
requesting that they submit documentation to support certain
deductions claimed on their tax return. Petitioners did not
respond with the requested documentation. Instead, petitioners’
attorney, Lowell E. Mann (Mr. Mann), sent a letter on May 23,
2005, protesting respondent’s proposed adjustments and requesting
that the case be transferred to respondent’s Appeals Office.
1(...continued)
We 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