- 16 -
partnership or "affected" item.7 If an FPAA is issued before the
end of the 3-year period of limitations of section 6229(a), that
period is suspended for the time during which a partnership-level
proceeding is brought and a decision in that proceeding becomes
final, and for 1 year thereafter. Sec. 6229(d).
Petitioner's argument is without merit. It is well
established that the issue of the timeliness of an FPAA must be
raised during the partnership-level proceeding, and thus may not
be raised subsequently by petitioner in this partner-level
proceeding. Crowell v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 683, 693 (1994).
Second, petitioner argues that the notices were untimely
because respondent artificially extended the partnership
proceeding by needless delay and thus should be estopped from
issuing the notices. This argument is equally meritless.
Estoppel constitutes an affirmative defense with the result that,
in respect of its impact on the timeliness of the notices of
deficiency, the burden of proof is on petitioner. Rules 39,
142(a); Hofstetter v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 695, 701 (1992).
We see no need to detail the various elements which are
essential to a successful assertion of equitable estoppel. See
Lignos v. United States, 439 F.2d 1365, 1368 (2d Cir. 1971);
Norfolk S. Corp. v. Commissioner, 104 T.C. 13, 59-61,
7 Consistent with our decision in Hambrose Leasing v.
Commissioner, 99 T.C. 298 (1992), the deductions at issue are
"affected" items.
Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011