We routinely would take the position that inherited property that was not used by the recipient as rental property or for some other business purpose, was "property held for investment" by the recipient. Thus when the property was sold, any costs related to the sale would be added to the recipient's tax basis of the property (generally the fair market value ie. the gross selling price as discussed above) and since it was property held for investment, the resulting loss (due to the selling expenses, deed stamps, sales commissions, legal fees, etc.) would be a reported as a long-term capital loss on the recipient's tax return for the year of sale.
This same treatment would apply if the estate sold the property.
However, the IRS has begun to contest that treatment (in essence contesting the inherited property's status as "property held for investment" & has taken the position that the property remains personal use property in the hands of the recipient if that's what the status of the property was in the hands of the decedent.
As personal use property, any loss on the sale would not be deductible.
The IRS has successfully taken this position to court in a recent court case with an estate that treated the property as "property held for investment" as described above. The IRS won this case, putting this treatment in jeopardy.
I only mention this in case your CPA used this treatment on your 2014 tax return. Just so you know the facts behind the treatment. If no loss was claimed, then there's no issue to be concerned about. In any event, the only time this likely could arise as an issue, related to a now filed 2014 tax return, would be in the case of an audit of the return.