- 58 - partners here voluntarily permitted Finkelman's petition and apparent authority to exist, a situation that should not redound to their own benefit and to respondent's detriment." Id. at 367. Participants in the instant case are in a situation similar to that of the partners in Mishawaka. During the Davenport audit and subsequent proceedings, Winer was the only partner or person who dealt regularly with respondent's agents, appeals officers, and counsel, except for Gordon and Hack, who were chosen by Winer as litigation counsel, and the accountants also chosen by Winer. At all relevant times, Winer retained his position as the sole general partner of Davenport. Both Winer and his attorney, Gordon, held Winer out to respondent as TMP. Respondent sent notices of FPAA's to Winer and all of the notice partners of Davenport, including participants and DL & Associates. When the petition was filed in this case, Winer identified himself as the TMP of Davenport. As in Mishawaka, respondent treated the petition filed by Winer as precluding assessment of deficiencies against the partners until the partnership proceeding was concluded. In addition, before the filing of the petition, Winer had signed all of the partnership returns as general partner. Winer chose accountants to handle the partnership audit and hired attorneys to handle the partnership litigation. Winer provided the investors with: (1) Tax information for the purposes of filing returns; (2) status reports regarding thePage: Previous 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011