- 33 -
Petitioners' contention that the notice of FPAA was
not sent to the tax matters partner is based upon the
assertion that Mr. Denny, who held the largest profits
interest in the partnership, was the tax matters partner
pursuant to section 6231(a)(7)(B), and that Mr. Caldwell,
who may have held himself out as the tax matters partner,
was not the tax matters partner because he was never
designated as such either by the Internal Revenue Service
or by the partnership.
Petitioners assert that the notice of FPAA was not
mailed to Mr. Denny, the tax matters partner. In order to
prove that fact, they rely upon a stipulation set forth in
the stipulation of facts filed in this case that "No FPAA
was ever sent to Bill Denny in the capacity of Tax Matter
[sic] Partner". They also rely on a stipulation set forth
in the Rule 122 stipulation that "No FPAA was ever sent to
Bill Denny whose address is 4333 Willow Lane, Dallas,
Texas." Finally, they rely on Mr. Denny's testimony that
he never received the notice of FPAA.
In advancing the contention that the notice of FPAA
was not sent to the tax matters partner, petitioners fail
to take into account the fact that respondent mailed the
notice of FPAA not only to Mr. Caldwell but also to "Tax
Matters Partner c/o Wayne H. Caldwell Escrow". The use of
Page: Previous 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011