Opinion
26249-22
03-27-2023
WESLEY L. GARDUNIA, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On January 11, 2023, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the grounds that (1) as to notices of deficiency issued for petitioner's 2015 and 2016 tax years, the petition was not filed within the time prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code, and (2) respondent has made no other determination sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court as to petitioner's 2015 and 2016 tax years. Although the Court provided petitioner the opportunity to file an objection, if any, to respondent's motion, petitioner has not done so.
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. Jurisdiction must be proven affirmatively, and a taxpayer invoking our jurisdiction bears the burden of proving that we have jurisdiction over the taxpayer's case. See Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975); Wheeler's Peachtree Pharmacy, Inc. v. Commissioner, 35 T.C. 177, 180 (1960). In a deficiency case, this Court's jurisdiction depends on the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and the timely filing of a petition within 90 days, or 150 days if the notice is addressed to a person outside the United States, after the notice of deficiency is mailed (not counting Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday in the District of Columbia as the last day). Rule 13(a), (c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Hallmark Research Collective v. Commissioner, No. 21284-21, 159 T.C. (Nov. 29, 2022); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988).
Similarly, in a case seeking review of certain IRS collection activity, the Court's jurisdiction depends on the issuance of a valid notice of determination (after the taxpayer has properly requested a collection due process hearing) under Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) section 6320 or 6330 and the filing by the taxpayer of a petition concerning that IRS determination. Smith v. Commissioner, 124 T.C. 36, 38 (2005); I.R.C. sec. 6320(c) and 6330(d)(1); Rule 330(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Other types of IRS notices which may form the basis for a petition to the Tax Court, likewise under statutorily prescribed parameters, are a notice of determination concerning relief from joint and several liability (or failure of IRS to make determination within 6 months after election or request for relief), a notice of final determination for disallowance of interest abatement claim (or failure of IRS to make final determination within 180 days after claim for abatement), a notice of determination of worker classification, a notice of determination under section 7623 concerning whistleblower action, and a notice of certification of a seriously delinquent Federal tax debt to the Department of State. No pertinent claims involving I.R.C. sections 6015, 6404(h), 7436, 7623, or 7345, respectively, appear to be involved in this case.
The record in this case establishes that the petition was not timely filed as to the notices of deficiency issued to petitioner for his 2015 and 2016 tax years. Furthermore, petitioner has not demonstrated that respondent made any other determination as to petitioner's 2015 and 2016 tax years that would permit petitioner to invoke this Court's jurisdiction. Accordingly, the Court is obliged to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. However, although petitioner cannot prosecute this case in this Court, petitioner may continue to pursue an administrative resolution of the 2015 and 2016 tax liabilities directly with the IRS.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.