- 40 -
Our conclusion that the period of limitations referred to in
section 6229(d) is the period of limitations that remains open
when the FPAA is issued, rather than just the minimum period, is
also consistent with the language of the conference committee
report for TEFRA, which states:
The period for assessment is suspended upon
mailing of a notice of FPAA until the expiration of the
period during which a petition for judicial review may
be filed by any partner (or, if an action is brought
during such period, until the decision of the court has
become final) and for one year thereafter. [H. Conf.
Rept. 97-760, supra at 606, 1982-2 C.B. at 665-666;
emphasis added.]
Based on all the foregoing considerations, we believe that
our interpretation of section 6229(d) is the more reasonable one;
especially in light of the previously mentioned admonition of the
Supreme Court that statutes of limitations are to be strictly
construed in favor of the Government.34
33(...continued)
where in interpreting the statute of limitations in sec. 6501,
the Court stated:
We agree with the conclusion of the Court of Appeals in
the instant cases that Congress could not have intended
to “create a situation in which persons who committed
willful, deliberate fraud would be in a better
position” than those who understated their income
inadvertently and without fraud. * * *
34Recently, the Supreme Court again had occasion to comment
on its approach to construing statutes of limitations when it
stated:
Even if it could credibly be argued that �6501(a)
(continued...)
Page: Previous 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011