- 2 - determination that he was a partner because (1) P claimed on prior returns that he was a partner, and (2) P received a Schedule K-1 from the partnership for the year in issue and failed to file with his return a Form 8082, Notice of Inconsistent Treatment or Administrative Adjustment Request, notifying respondent of his position that he was not a partner. Therefore, the applicable period of limitations under sec. 6229, I.R.C., for R to assess the deficiency has not expired. Held, further, we have jurisdiction to consider partner-level adjustments in a Rule 155 computation. R. Todd Luoma, for petitioners. Kathryn K. Vetter, for respondent. BEGHE, Judge: On December 17, 1999, respondent issued petitioners an “affected items” notice of deficiency of $11,826 in their 1992 Federal income tax. The deficiency is attributable to inclusion in the income of petitioner Rodney J. Blonien (Mr. Blonien) of his distributive share of cancellation of debt (COD) income of Finley, Kumble, Wagner, Heine, Underberg, Manley, Myerson & Casey (Finley Kumble), a law partnership that had become insolvent. Petitioners allege assessment is barred by the 3-year period of limitations provided in section 6501(a)1 because Mr. Blonien was not a partner of Finley Kumble subject to the alternative period of limitations provided by section 6229 for the assessment 1Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year at issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.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