Gerald H. Evans - Page 8




                                        - 8 -                                         

          year in issue.  In this regard, petitioner refers to the                    
          requirements under section 6223.                                            
               As previously mentioned, under the facts of this case the              
          address to which respondent mailed the notice of deficiency is              
          irrelevant because petitioner received the notice and filed a               
          timely petition.  Regardless, as pertinent here, section 6223               
          requires the Commissioner to send the Notice of Beginning                   
          Administrative Proceeding (NBAP) and the FPAA to each partner               
          whose name and address is furnished to the Commissioner.  Under             
          paragraph (c) of that section, unless additional information is             
          provided, the Commissioner is required to use the address shown             
          on the partnership return in mailing the NBAP and the FPAA.                 
          However, there is no requirement under section 6223 that the                
          Commissioner mail an affected items notice of deficiency to a               
          taxpayer at an address provided in the partnership return.                  
               Rather, as provided under section 6230(a)(2)(A)(i), the                
          normal deficiency procedures apply to affected items that require           
          partner-level determinations.  The additions to tax involved                
          herein--additions for negligence under section 6653(a) and for              
          overvaluation understatement under section 6659--are affected               
          items requiring factual determinations at the individual partner            
          level.  See N.C.F. Energy Partners v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 741,            
          744-746 (1987).  As a result, normal deficiency procedures apply            
          in this case and, as discussed above, under normal deficiency               
          procedures the notice of deficiency involved herein is valid.               
          See Frieling v. Commissioner, supra.                                        

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

Last modified: May 25, 2011