- 47 - adequate substantiation for the business expense deductions disallowed in the notice of deficiency. Taking into account controlling legal precedent and based on the facts available to respondent when the notice of deficiency was issued, as well as when the answer was filed, we find that respondent’s position that results from that refusal has a reasonable basis in law and fact and therefore is substantially justified. See Maggie Mgmt. Co. v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. at 443. Our conclusion on this point is not altered by the fact that a settlement was achieved after “mock-up” tax returns that differed from all of the returns previously submitted by petitioners and additional substantiation were provided and reviewed by respondent’s counsel. See Harrison v. Commissioner, 854 F.2d 263, 265 (7th Cir. 1988), affg. T.C. Memo. 1987-52; Wickert v. Commissioner, 842 F.2d 1005 (8th Cir. 1988), affg. T.C. Memo. 1986-277. II. The “Deferred Income” Issue In the notice of deficiency and in his answer, respondent takes the position that $195,000 of licensing fees received by ISOA, Inc., are includable in its income in the year received. According to petitioners, respondent has failed to establish that his position has a reasonable basis in law. Petitioners argue that respondent’s position is, therefore, not substantially justified.Page: Previous 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 NextLast modified: November 10, 2007