- 15 -
not a new one. In cases such as Dynamic Energy, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 98 T.C. 48 (1992), and Marthinuss v. Commissioner,
T.C. Memo. 1995-58, the Court indicated that the spouse of a
partner is not entitled to an adjudication of his or her
entitlement to relief from joint and several liability on a joint
return in a partnership-level proceeding. Further, in cases such
as Life Care Cmtys. of Am. v. Commissioner, supra, and Mann-
Howard v. Commissioner, supra, the Court indicated that the
spouse of a partner normally would be able to prosecute a claim
for relief from joint and several liability on a joint return in
response to an affected items notice of deficiency issued after
the completion of partnership-level proceedings.
As previously discussed, Congress prescribed specific
procedures for purposes of TEFRA partnership actions under which
the spouse of a partner is permitted to obtain an adjudication of
a claim for relief from joint and several liability on a joint
return. Section 6230(a)(3), which refers to section 6013(e) (now
stricken), provides a remedy in the form of a deficiency
proceeding, whereas section 6230(c)(5) provides an alternative
remedy in the form of a refund action. Significantly, in either
case, the spouse of a partner may assert a claim for relief from
joint and several liability only after the Commissioner has
issued to the spouse a notice of computational adjustment.
However, the Commissioner may issue a notice of computational
Page: Previous 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Next
Last modified: November 10, 2007