Michael V. Domulewicz and Mary Ann Domulewicz - Page 2




                                        - 2 -                                         
               DII.  P claimed that the loss offset a $5,831,772                      
               capital gain that P realized during the year.  In an                   
               FPAA pertaining to DIP, R determined that the basis of                 
               the stock distributed by DIP was zero and that                         
               accuracy-related penalties under sec. 6662, I.R.C.,                    
               applied.  When no petition was filed as to the FPAA, R                 
               did not assess any tax or accuracy-related penalty as                  
               to DII’s sale of the stock.  Instead, R issued an                      
               affected items notice of deficiency to Ps as a                         
               predicate to assessing those amounts.  Ps now move the                 
               Court to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction,                   
               asserting that the deficiency procedures of subch. B of                
               ch. 63, I.R.C. (deficiency procedures), do not apply to                
               R’s disallowance of the passthrough loss or to R’s                     
               determination of the accuracy-related penalties.                       
                    Held:  Sec. 6230(a)(2)(A)(i), I.R.C., makes the                   
               deficiency procedures applicable to R’s disallowance of                
               the passthrough loss from DII.                                         
                    Held, further, R’s determination of the                           
               accuracy-related penalties is not subject to the                       
               deficiency procedures by virtue of the parenthetical                   
               text added to sec. 6230(a)(2)(A)(i), I.R.C., by the                    
               Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997, Pub. L. 105-34, sec.                      
               1238(b)(2), 111 Stat. 1026.                                            


               David D. Aughtry, Eric M. Nemeth, and Paul L.B. McKenney,              
          for petitioners.                                                            
               Meso T. Hammoud, for respondent.                                       


                                       OPINION                                        

               LARO, Judge:  This is a Son-of-BOSS case that is currently             
          before the Court on petitioners’ motion to dismiss for lack of              
          jurisdiction.  See generally Kligfeld Holdings v. Commissioner,             
          128 T.C. 192 (2007), and Notice 2000-44, 2000-2 C.B. 255, for a             
          general description of Son-of-BOSS cases.  Petitioners petitioned           







Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  Next 

Last modified: November 10, 2007