-4-
As will be shown in the discussion that follows, petitioners
have raised no genuine issue as to any material fact.
Accordingly, we conclude that this case is ripe for summary
judgment.
B. Petitioners Are Precluded From Litigating the Deficiency
Petitioners allege in their petition that respondent erred
in attributing to them income received from RPT PRN LLC. We
reject petitioners’ allegation as we lack jurisdiction over the
deficiency in their income tax attributable to their
distributable share of income from RPT PRN LLC. Petitioners had
an opportunity to raise their allegation during the TEFRA
procedures,1 but they failed to do so.
The TEFRA procedures provide a method for adjusting
“partnership items” in a single unified partnership proceeding,
rather than in multiple separate actions, each involving a single
partner. Maxwell v. Commissioner, 87 T.C. 783, 787 (1986).
In general, the Commissioner is precluded from assessing a
deficiency in income tax attributable to a partnership item, or
any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount which relates
to the partnership item, until after the completion of the
1 The unified audit and litigation procedures were enacted
as part of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982
(TEFRA), Pub. L. 97-248, sec. 401(a), 96 Stat. 648, and are
commonly referred to as the TEFRA procedures.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011