-6- “affected item”. As indicated above, the deficiency in petitioners’ income tax for 1996 is attributable to partnership items of RPT PRN LLC and was assessed as a computational adjustment after the partnership-level proceeding involving that entity was completed. Therefore, we lack jurisdiction to redetermine that deficiency in this affected items case. Saso v. Commissioner, supra; Palmer v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-352; Taylor v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1992-219. Accordingly, we hold that petitioners are precluded from contesting that deficiency in this proceeding. C. Accuracy-Related Penalty Under Section 6662(d) Respondent determined that petitioners are liable for the accuracy-related penalty under section 6662(d) as a result of a substantial understatement of their income tax. Section 6662(a) imposes an accuracy-related penalty in the amount of 20 percent of the portion of the underpayment attributable to any substantial understatement of income tax. Sec. 6662(b)(2). The underpayment is defined as the amount by which any tax imposed exceeds the excess of the sum of the amount shown as the tax by the taxpayer on his return, plus amounts not so shown previously assessed (or collected without assessment), over the amount of rebates made. Sec. 6664(a). The understatement is defined as the excess of the amount of tax required to be shown on the return over the amount of tax shown on the return reduced by anyPage: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011