- 7 -
This Court does not have jurisdiction to redetermine
petitioner's liability for deficiencies that were assessed by
computational adjustment and for section 6621(c) interest in the
context of this affected items proceeding. Petitioner's
liability for increased interest under section 6621(c) could be
adjudicated only under overpayment jurisdiction, see Barton v.
Commissioner, 97 T.C. 548 (1991), and petitioner does not allege
an overpayment of such interest. This Court's jurisdiction is
provided by statute, and we cannot expand that jurisdiction. See
Genesis Oil & Gas, Ltd. v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 562, 565 (1989).
Congress has provided a method by which taxpayers may petition
the courts to raise any and all questions pertaining to a
partnership action. See id. Within 90 days after the day on
which an FPAA is mailed to the TMP, the TMP may file a petition
for a readjustment of the partnership items. See sec. 6226(a).
If the TMP does not file a readjustment petition with respect to
the FPAA, any notice partner may, within 60 days after the close
of the 90-day period in which the TMP may file a petition, file a
petition for a readjustment of the partnership items.2 See sec.
2
For partnership tax years ending after Aug. 5, 1997, a
person who was a partner in such partnership at any time during
such year may participate in such action or file a readjustment
petition (within the 60-day period that notice partners may file
a petition) solely for the purpose of asserting that the period
of limitations for assessing any tax attributable to partnership
items has expired with respect to such person, and the court
having jurisdiction of such action shall have jurisdiction to
(continued...)
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011