Cinema '84, Richard M. Greenberg, Tax Matters Partner - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
          tax matters partner (TMP), Richard M. Greenberg, was in                     
          bankruptcy and was disqualified as the TMP.  This is correct.               
          Movant then asserts that either the Tax Court or respondent                 
          should have appointed a new TMP.  This ignores the fact that,               
          since 1995, the Court attempted in vain to find a limited partner           
          who would be willing to serve as the TMP.  Finally, movant                  
          alleges that the Court’s affirmance of respondent’s                         
          determinations created a whipsaw that “is patently unreasonable,            
          unfair, unjust and inequitable.”  We are willing to assume that             
          this is also correct.  But the fact is that none of these                   
          allegations, standing alone or together, constitute a fraud on              
          the Court or other valid reason for vacating a final decision of            
          this Court.5                                                                
               In concluding, we note that the decided cases regarding                
          vacating a final decision of the Court involve so-called                    
          deficiency cases rather than TEFRA partnership cases.  The                  
          current section 7481(a) is derived from section 1005(a) of the              
          Revenue Act of 1926, ch. 27, tit. X, 44 Stat. 10.  The                      
          legislative history states:                                                 
               Inasmuch as the statute of limitations upon assessments                
               and suits for collection, both of which are suspended                  
               during review of the Commissioner’s determination,                     
               commences to run upon the day upon which the Board’s                   


               5  Indeed, we note that, putting aside the problem with the            
          finality of the decision, the movant offers no explanation as to            
          the reason for his failure to timely move to participate in this            
          proceeding.                                                                 




Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011