- 5 -
The FPAA's previously issued to the TMP of MCDA II referred
to the partnership solely as "Mid Continent Drilling Associates
II", and also listed 13-3093089 as the EIN.
No partners of MCDA II elected to participate in the Lax
case within the time specified under Rule 245(a) and (b). See
Rule 247(b).
On February 11, 1993, this Court entered a decision in the
Lax case under Rule 248(b) which sustained the adjustments to the
partnership items of MCDA II for taxable years 1983 and 1984.
This decision became final on May 12, 1993. Secs. 7481(a)(1) and
7483.
On January 10, 1994, respondent mailed notices of deficiency
for affected items to petitioners which related to the
partnership items determined in the Lax case. The only
adjustments in the notices of deficiency were for additions to
tax and increased interest for 1983 and 1984.
Petitioners claim that the applicable period of limitations
has expired because "the multiple defects in the Lax Petition
reduced that case to a nullity insofar as it relates to the
Goldman Petitioners." Their argument that the partnership level
proceeding is a "nullity" is based on the caption in that case,
which reads, in pertinent part, "Midcontinental Drilling Co.
Partnership". Because the caption in the Lax case does not read
"Mid Continent Drilling Associates II", petitioners characterize
the caption as "defective", and argue as follows:
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011