- 9 -
person partnership at the time the partnership purchased the
property, at the time it was condemned and sold to the State of
Florida, and at the time the statutory replacement period
expired. Petitioner knew that if replacement property were not
purchased, the deferred gain would have to be recognized and
reported. Furthermore, petitioner knew the partnership had not
purchased replacement property, that the time to do so had
expired, and that the partnership had prepared an amended return
for 1992 reporting the gain from the sale of the property.
Finally, petitioner knew that Segrest had received a Schedule K-1
informing Segrest of his portion of the deferred gain from the
sale of the property.
Although petitioner was aware of all the facts regarding the
property, he never inquired whether he had any gain from its
sale, nor did he inquire as to why he did not receive a Schedule
K-1 for the amended return year. As a general partner,
petitioner had access to the partnership's books and records, its
amended return, and the public accounting firm that prepared the
amended return, any of which would have informed petitioner of
his portion of the gain from the sale of the property. Although
the information necessary for petitioners to report their proper
tax liability was available, petitioner made no effort to obtain
such information.
It is evident from the record that petitioners did not make
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011