Michael J. Heckler, a.k.a. Michael Vonheckler and Charlotte A. Miska - Page 11

                                       - 11 -                                         

          reviewed in partnership level proceedings.  N.C.F. Energy                   
          Partners v. Commissioner, supra at 745.                                     
          However, as explained in White v. Commissioner, 95 T.C. at                  
          212-214, an individual partner's liability for section 6621(c)              
          interest normally cannot be raised in a so-called affected items            
          proceeding.  In White, the Commissioner issued a notice of                  
          deficiency to the taxpayers solely for additions to tax after the           
          underlying tax deficiency was assessed as a computational                   
          adjustment following the conclusion of partnership level                    
          proceedings.  When the taxpayers filed a petition contesting the            
          additions to tax as well as their liability for additional                  
          interest under section 6621(c), the Commissioner responded by               
          filing a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction as to the               
          additional interest.                                                        
               In granting the Commissioner's motion to dismiss in White,             
          we first held, based upon a combined reading of sections 6211(a),           
          6230(a), and 6601(e)(1), that interest computed at the increased            
          rate prescribed in section 6621(c)(1) is not a deficiency within            
          the meaning of section 6211(a).  Consistent with this holding, we           
          rejected the taxpayers' argument that section 6230(a)(2)(A)(i)              
          provides statutory authority for this Court to redetermine such             
          interest.  Next, we analyzed section 6621(c)(4) and concluded               
          that our jurisdiction under that provision is limited to                    
          determining only the portion of a deficiency in tax imposed under           





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011