- 49 - partnership. Respondent then mailed the notices of final partnership administrative adjustment; Winer commenced the partnership action at docket No. 14535-89; and, ultimately, the Court entered decision, pursuant to the Commissioner’s motion under Rule 248(b), which completely sustained the Commissioner’s FPAA determinations. Petitioners allege that they were never informed of the settlement offer by respondent at the time that the offer was made. Respondent counters that the settlement offer was made to Winer as Whitman’s tax matters partner and that any failure by Winer to inform all of the limited partners of the existence of the offer does not require respondent to renew the offer. We agree with respondent. There is no statutory or regulatory provision that obligates respondent, when making a settlement offer to the tax matters partner of a TEFRA partnership, to provide notice to the partnership’s limited partners of the fact of such offer. To the contrary, section 6223(g) provides, in part, that “the tax matters partner of a partnership shall keep each partner informed of all administrative and judicial proceedings for the adjustment at the partnership level of partnership items.” In other words, to the extent that Whitman’s limited partners were entitled to notice regarding respondent’s making of the October 1988 settlement offer, the duty to provide such notice lay with WinerPage: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011