- 11 -
the partnership adjustments. See Crowell v. Commissioner, 102
T.C. at 693. Respondent is not responsible for Mr. Hoyt’s
failure to provide notice or satisfy his obligation under the
TEFRA provisions. See sec. 6230(f); Vander Heide v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-74.
Finally, petitioner contends that a duty was created which
required respondent to mail copies of the FPAA to each of the 116
partners of Ranch Properties because respondent had done so in
prior years. We disagree. Respondent satisfied the notice
requirement of section 6223(a) by mailing the FPAA by certified
mail to the TMP at the two addresses noted in Ranch Properties’
1994 tax return. See Energy Res. Ltd. v. Commissioner, 91 T.C.
913, 914 (1988). The fact that respondent had sent notices to
SGE or other partners in prior years is irrelevant. See id. at
917 (The receipt of an FPAA by a less than 1-percent interest
partner, who was not a member of a notice group, does not render
the partner a notice partner).
Because we concluded above that SGE was neither a notice
partner nor a member of a 5-percent group entitled to notice from
respondent of the FPAA, it is not necessary to discuss SGE’s
equitable tolling argument. See id.
Accordingly, we shall grant respondent’s motion to dismiss
for lack of jurisdiction.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011