Cambridge Research and Development Group, Thomas P. Straus, a Partner Other Than the Tax Matters Partner v. Commissioner., United States Tax Court - Memorandum Decision, T.C. Memo. 1991-434, Docket No. 8391-88., Filed September 5, 1991
Cambridge Research and Development Group, Thomas P. Straus, a Partner Other Than the Tax Matters Partner v. Commissioner.
United States Tax Court - Memorandum Decision
T.C. Memo. 1991-434
Docket No. 8391-88.
Filed September 5, 1991.
Geoffrey J. O'Connor, 600 Old Country Rd., Garden City, N.Y., for the petitioner. Joseph F. Long, for the respondent.
HALPERN, Judge. Petitioner is a limited partner in Cambridge Research and Development Group (Cambridge Research), owning a greater than 1 percent capital and profits interest therein during 1983. Accordingly, for 1983, petitioner was a notice partner within the meanings of sections 6226(b)(1) and 6231(a)(8). 1
1 Unless otherwise noted, all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended and in effect for the year in issue, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Petitioner resided in Rye, New York, at the time of filing his petition.
The petition in this case was filed on April 27, 1988, in response to a notice of final partnership administrative adjustment (FPAA) issued by respondent to Cambridge Research in January 1988. That FPAA was issued after the general 3-year statutory period of limitations had expired under section 6229(a). Prior to filing the petition herein, Kenneth Sherman filed a petition for readjustment in response to that FPAA as tax matters partner for Cambridge Research. Petitioners in both cases contested the effectiveness of a Form 872-O consent signed by another partner in Cambridge Research. Because our decision in the case instituted by Kenneth Sherman would effect resolution of this case, we granted the parties' joint motion to continue filed November 9, 1990.
In our opinion in Cambridge Research and Development Group v. Commissioner [Dec. 47,596], 97 T.C. ___ (1991), we held that Kenneth Sherman is the tax matters partner for Cambridge Research for 1983 and we had jurisdiction to consider the merits in that case. We lack jurisdiction over petitions for readjustment of partnership items filed by notice partners in the presence of earlier, valid petitions filed by tax matters partners. Sec. 6226(a), (b)(1); Computer Programs Lambda, Ltd. v. Commissioner [Dec. 44,072], 89 T.C. 198, 205 (1987). Accordingly, we lack jurisdiction over this case and it will be dismissed.
An order of dismissal will be entered.