- 5 -
which had economic substance and constituted a trade or business
for all purposes of the Internal Revenue laws, and (3) the
partnership engaged in the trade or business of farming primarily
for the purpose of earning profits.
Additional History of the Case
On July 30, 1990, respondent moved to extend the time within
which to move or answer the petition from July 30, 1990, to
August 27, 1990. We granted that motion on August 2, 1990.
On August 13, 1990, respondent moved to stay the proceedings
prior to answer for a period of 1 year (the motion to stay). In
support of the motion to stay, respondent claimed that petitioner
and certain others were under criminal investigation for their
activities in connection with the partnership and other
partnerships sponsored by Amcor Capital, Inc., formerly American
Agri-Corp. (without distinction, AMCOR). Although petitioner was
not, then, a participating partner, see Rule 247(b), and
respondent claimed that none of the participating partners were
under criminal investigation for their activities in connection
with any AMCOR-related partnership, respondent believed that a
stay was required to avoid conflicts and difficulties arising
from the ongoing criminal investigation of petitioner and certain
others. The petitioning partners objected to the motion to stay,
arguing, among other things, that not only were none of the
participating partners under any related criminal investigation
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011