- 12 -
argument fails. For clarity, we shall analyze the validity of
the notices of deficiency separately with respect to decedent and
Mrs. Callaway.
Jurisdiction: Estate of James T. Callaway
The Court's jurisdiction is dependent upon a valid notice of
deficiency and timely filed petition for redetermination. Rule
13(a), (c); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Normac,
Inc. & Normac Intl. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988). In
Crowell v. Commissioner, 102 T.C. 683, 691-692 (1994), the Court
held that a taxpayer may contest the validity of a notice of
deficiency for affected items on the ground that the taxpayer's
partnership items converted to nonpartnership items by virtue of
the Commissioner's alleged failure to notify properly the
taxpayer of partnership level proceedings.
Consistent with Crowell, and considering respondent's
concession that Mrs. Callaway filed a valid request for prompt
assessment on behalf of decedent's estate, the Court sua sponte
raised the issue of the validity of the notices of deficiency for
affected items insofar as the notices were issued to decedent's
estate. In particular, because decedent's Mountain View
partnership items converted to nonpartnership items for the years
at issue in this case pursuant to section 301.6231(c)-8T,
Temporary Proced. & Admin. Regs., 52 Fed. Reg. 6794 (Mar. 5,
1987), it follows that the question of decedent's tax liability
Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011