Opinion
26117-22SL
03-02-2023
MOHAMMAD A. JANJUA, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge.
On December 16, 2022, petitioner filed the petition to commence this case, in which petitioner seeks review of a notice of determination, dated November 17, 2022, issued to petitioner with respect to a levy for petitioner's 2017 tax year.
On January 10, 2022, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss on Grounds of Mootness asserting among other things that (1) petitioner has fully paid the 2017 income tax liability at issue in this case and (2) because the tax liability has been fully paid, respondent no longer needs and does not intend to levy to collect the tax liability for petitioner's 2017 tax year.
On January 26, 2023, petitioner filed an opposition to Motion to Dismiss on Ground of Mootness, in which petitioner does not dispute that the 2017 tax liability has been fully paid, but seeks to have the Court deny respondent's motion, because respondent failed to consider petitioner's amended 2017 tax return and applied refunds for other tax years to petitioner's 2017 tax liability.
On these facts, petitioner's challenge to the collection action is moot. See Greene-Thapedi v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 1, 7-8; cf. Vignon v. Commissioner, 149 T.C. 97, 105 n.4 (2017). This Court does not have jurisdiction to determine an overpayment or order a refund under I.R.C. sections 6320 or 6330. Greene-Thapedi v. Commissioner, 126 T.C. 1, 12-13.
However, although petitioner may not prosecute a case in this Court, petitioner may continue to pursue administrative resolution relating to petitioner's 2017 tax liability directly with the IRS. Also, petitioner may possibly file a claim for refund with the IRS and then (if the claim is denied or not acted on for six months), bring a suit for refund in the appropriate Federal district court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. See McCormick v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 138, 142 (1970); I.R.C. sec. 6511(a).
Upon due consideration, it is 2
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss on Grounds of Mootness is granted and this case is dismissed.