David E. and Jean H. Kohn - Page 3




                                        - 3 -                                         

          in court proceedings.  Subsequently, Department of Justice                  
          attorneys moved the court to reinstate Winer as Hamilton's TMP              
          for the purpose of providing "administrative services".                     
               Following Winer's reinstatement, Winer and respondent                  
          entered into a series of agreements extending the period of                 
          limitations for assessing tax relative to Hamilton for the years            
          1982 through 1985.  On March 13, 1989, respondent issued a notice           
          of Final Partnership Administrative Adjustment (FPAA) to Hamilton           
          for its 1982 through 1985 years.  On May 15, 1989, Winer filed a            
          petition with this Court on behalf of Hamilton that commenced a             
          partnership action docketed as Hamilton Recycling Associates, Sam           
          Winer, Tax Matters Partner, Petitioner v. Commissioner of                   
          Internal Revenue, docket No. 9990-89.                                       
               In 1993, Winer, as TMP, entered into a settlement agreement            
          with respondent to the effect that Hamilton conceded all                    
          adjustments in the FPAA.  Accordingly, on November 9, 1993,                 
          pursuant to Rule 248(b), respondent filed a motion for entry of             
          decision and lodged with the Court a proposed decision that                 
          reflected a full concession by the partnership of all partnership           
          items for 1982 through 1985.  No party objected to the proposed             
          decision.  Therefore, on February 17, 1994, respondent's motion             
          for entry of decision was granted, and on February 23, 1994, the            
          proposed decision was entered as the decision of the Court.                 
          Since no party appealed the Court's decision, the decision became           





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

Last modified: May 25, 2011