- 19 -
AVA’s affirmative defense of the statute of limitations by
averring that the AVA 1984 Form 1065 is invalid because it was
not executed in conformance with the Internal Revenue Code.
Respondent is correct that only a return as required by the
Internal Revenue Code (a valid return) will fix the time for the
running of the period to assess tax (i.e., the statute of
limitations). See Plunkett v. Commissioner, 41 B.T.A. 700, 711
(1940), affd. 118 F.2d 644 (1st Cir. 1941). “Failure to satisfy
the requirements for filing a return is fatal to the validity and
timeliness of the return.” Elliott v. Commissioner, 113 T.C.
125, 128 (1999). Petitioner argues that the AVA’s 1984 Form 1065
is a valid return.
b. Requirement That Partnership Make a Return Signed
by a Partner
Section 6031 requires that, for each taxable year, every
partnership shall make a return of income.
In pertinent part, section 6063 provides: “The return of a
partnership made under section 6031 shall be signed by any one of
the partners.”
The AVA 1984 Form 1065 was signed by Joseph O. Voyer,
“Treasurer”. The parties have stipulated that Mr. Voyer, as
Treasurer of AMCOR, was a corporate officer with authority under
the regulations to execute returns and other statements on behalf
of AMCOR. The parties have further stipulated that, if AMCOR is
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011