- 45 -
Mr. Schreiber’s signature on the DV-85 Form 872-P for 1985 was
not duly authorized by the general partners of DV-85.
DV-85 also makes the same arguments that we considered supra
in section III.B.2.e., under the heading “AVA’s Other Arguments”.
We reject those arguments with respect to DV-85 for the same
reasons we rejected them with respect to AVA.
4. Conclusion
The DV-85 Form 872-P for 1985 was effective to extend the
3-year period for all of the partners of the partnership for
1985. The DV-85 FPAA was timely issued.
VI. HFA-II
A. FINDINGS OF FACT
HFA-II (sometimes, the partnership), a calendar-year
taxpayer, is a Texas limited partnership formed in 1985 pursuant
to the Texas Uniform Limited Partnership Act (sometimes, TULPA),
Tex. Rev. Civ. Stat. Ann. art. 6132a (West 1970).6
On May 22, 1985, James D. Dannenbaum and Mr. Wright, as
general partners, and certain others entered into an agreement of
limited partnership with respect to the partnership (the HFA-II
limited partnership agreement or the agreement). The agreement
6 There is a conflict between Stipulation of Facts E-1,
which recites that HFA-II was organized under the laws of
California, and the HFA-II agreement of limited partnership,
which recites that the partnership was formed under the laws of
Texas. We may disregard a stipulation where it is clearly
contrary to the evidence in the record, and we do so here. See
Jasionowski v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 312, 318 (1976).
Page: Previous 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011