- 14 -
jurisdiction over affected items when the Government accepts the
partnership return as filed because that fulfills the requirement
that there be an “outcome of a partnership proceeding” before
assessment of affected items); cf. GAF Corp. & Subs. v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 519 (2000) (Tax Court must dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction when the notice of deficiency adjusts
partnership or affected items before the completion of the
partnership-level proceeding). This situation is distinguishable
from GAF Corp. and similar to Roberts because respondent accepted
UK Lotto’s return as filed.
Having decided that we maintain jurisdiction and that
respondent’s assertion that the items in question are affected
items is correct, we must now resolve the issue of whether the
period of limitations under section 6229 has run on respondent’s
adjustments.
II. Statute of Limitations
The central point of contention in the issue involving the
statute of limitations is whether respondent’s omission of a
reference to partnership items in the Forms 872 executed with
petitioners results in the expiration of the periods of
limitation under sections 6501 and 6229.
A. Respondent Did Not Include Partnership Items in the
Forms 872
Section 6229(a) provides:
Page: Previous 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011