Mishawaka Properties Co. v. Commissioner
United States Tax Court
A participating partner in a TEFRA partnership proceeding filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because the petition that was filed during the 90-day period of sec. 6226(a), I.R.C., was executed by a partner other than the tax matters partner (TMP). Neither the partner qualified to be TMP nor any other partner attempted to file a petition in this proceeding.
Read the full summary
A participating partner in a TEFRA partnership proceeding filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because the petition that was filed during the 90-day period of sec. 6226(a), I.R.C., was executed by a partner other than the tax matters partner (TMP). Neither the partner qualified to be TMP nor any other partner attempted to file a petition in this proceeding. The partners, including the one who is now designated as TMP, do not now wish to ratify or otherwise approve the unauthorized filing by the non-TMP because they believe that the period for assessment against them has expired.…
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
Gerber, Judge:
This present controversy was initiated by a participating partner’s1 motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. The petition was filed within the 90-day period of section 6226(a)2 by a partner-promoter of a general partnership who was not the tax matters partner (tmp) at the time of filing. Further, the person who held the largest partnership interest and who was qualified as the TMP did not file a petition within 90 days, and no other partner filed within the additional 60-day period of section 6226(b)(1). We have found jurisdiction in some cases where the appropriate…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Rakestraw v. RodriguesCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
- Computer Programs Lambda, Ltd. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1987
- Brooks v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1975
- Amesbury Apartments, Ltd. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1990
- Carstenson v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1972
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Davenport Recycling Associates v. CommissionerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2000
- Klein v. United StatesDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1999
- Transpac Drilling Venture v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Transpac Drilling Venture v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Davenport Recycling Assocs. v. CommissionerUnited States Tax Court · 1998
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.