- 5 - proceedings; and (6) respondent's actions during the TEFRA proceedings constituted a fraud upon the Court. Discussion The tax treatment of Hamilton was determined at the partnership level pursuant to the TEFRA partnership provisions in sections 6221 through 6233. The partnership audit provisions provide a unified partnership proceeding for determination of the tax treatment of partnership items separate from and independent of a partner's deficiency proceeding involving nonpartnership items. See Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (TEFRA), Pub. L. 97-248, sec. 402(a), 96 Stat. 648; Brookes v. Commissioner, 108 T.C. 1, 5 (1997); Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787-788 (1986). Accordingly, this Court does not have jurisdiction in a partner's personal tax case to redetermine any portion of a deficiency attributable to partnership items. See sec. 6221; Brookes v. Commissioner, supra at 5; Maxwell v. Commissioner, supra at 788. A partnership item is defined as any item required to be taken into account for the partnership's taxable year to the extent that the Secretary provides by regulations that the item is more appropriately determined at the partnership level than at the partner level. See sec. 6231(a)(3); Brookes v. Commissioner, supra at 5; N.C.F. Energy Partners v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 741, 743 (1987). Partnership items include each partner'sPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011