Opinion
8068-23
09-29-2023
MEI LIU & BO YANG, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge.
On July 10, 2023, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the grounds that (1) with respect to tax year 2018, the Petition was not filed within the time prescribed by Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.), 26 U.S.C. section 6213(a) or section 7502; and that (2) with respect to tax years 2019, 2020, and 2021, no notice of deficiency, as authorized by I.R.C. section 6212 and required by I.R.C. section 6213(a) to form the basis for a petition to this Court has been sent to petitioners, nor has respondent made any other determination with respect to those years that would permit petitioners to invoke the Court's jurisdiction.
We will first address petitioners' 2018 tax year. The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, to which this case is appealable absent a stipulation to the contrary, has recently held that the filing deadline in I.R.C. section 6213(a) is not jurisdictional. See Culp v. Commissioner, 75 F.4th 196, ____ (3d Cir. 2023). Thus, with respect to tax year 2018, respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction must be denied. See Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C. 742, 757 (1970), aff'd, 445 F.2d 985 (10th Cir. 1971).
We turn next to petitioners' 2019, 2020, and 2021 tax years. The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. We may exercise jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute. Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). In addition, 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).
Although petitioners indicate in the Petition that they are challenging notices of deficiency for tax years 2019, 2020, and 2021, they have not provided any notices which would permit them to invoke this Court's jurisdiction with respect to those tax years, and respondent asserts in the motion that no such notices have been issued. Nothing in the record suggests that we have jurisdiction to hear petitioners' case with respect to tax years 2019, 2020, and 2021, and accordingly, we must grant respondent's Motion and dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction insofar as it concerns those years.
Upon due consideration and for cause, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is denied with respect to tax year 2018. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted with respect to tax years 2019, 2020, and 2021, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to 2019, 2020, and 2021. It is further
ORDERED that, on or before November 27, 2023, respondent shall file an Answer to First Amended Petition, as Amended.