- 2 -
decision is whether respondent’s denial was an abuse of
discretion. Because we decide that (1) respondent was not
required to notify petitioner of a TEFRA audit, (2) respondent is
not required to offer petitioner a consistent settlement, and (3)
respondent did not err or delay in performing a ministerial act,
we hold that it was not an abuse of discretion.
FINDINGS OF FACT
Some of the facts are stipulated. The stipulation of facts
and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this
reference. At the time the petition was filed, petitioner
resided in Woodland Hills, California.
On his 1983 Federal income tax return, petitioner reported a
loss of $14,056, attributable to his investment in a partnership
called Asher & Associates (Asher). On his 1984 Federal income
tax return, petitioner reported a loss of $757 on Schedule E,
Supplemental Income and Loss, attributable to Asher. Asher was a
limited partner in Wilshire West Associates (Wilshire), one of 50
coal tax shelter partnerships or joint ventures (Swanton
programs) created by Norman Swanton (Mr. Swanton).2 In 1972, Mr.
2 Wilshire and 18 other Swanton partnerships were formed
after the enactment of the Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility
Act of 1982 (TEFRA), Pub. L. 97-248, secs. 402-407(a), 96 Stat.
648, and are subject to the partnership rules of TEFRA. The
remaining 30 Swanton partnerships were formed before the
enactment of TEFRA.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011