Opinion
7377-21
05-03-2022
PHYLLIS D. MABBETT, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Albert G. Lauber Judge
In March 2021 petitioner filed a Petition stating that she was disputing a notice of determination concerning collection action issued by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent). She did not attach to her petition a copy of a notice of determination (or of any other IRS notice). Rather, she attached a Form 4549-A, Income Tax Examination Changes, and a Form 886-A, Explanation of Items, dated January 30, 2021. These documents show adjustments that the IRS made to petitioner's 2008 account in response to an offer-in-compromise, predicated on doubt as to liability, that she submitted to the IRS on September 25, 2019.
This case was originally calendared on the Court's February 7, 2022, Denver, Colorado, trial session. By Order served January 5, 2022, we continued the case. On March 7, 2022, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. By Order served March 8, 2022, we directed petitioner to respond to the Motion. We advised that we would likely grant the Motion unless she attached to her response a copy of the IRS determination that she contends gives the Court jurisdiction over this case. On April 18, 2022, petitioner filed a response, but she did not attach to that response (or aver that the IRS has issued) a notice of determination or a notice of deficiency for 2008. Nor does she contend that the IRS has taken any type of collection action against her with respect to her 2008 tax year.
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction and may exercise jurisdiction only to the extent authorized by Congress. See I.R.C. § 7442. Our jurisdiction over a collection due process case is conditioned on the IRS's issuance of a notice of determination concerning collection action. See Moorhous v. Commissioner, 116 T.C. 263, 269 (2001); I.R.C. §§ 6320(c), 6330(d)(1). Similarly, our jurisdiction over a deficiency case is conditioned on the IRS's issuance of a statutory notice of deficiency. See Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); I.R.C. § 6213(a). The party seeking to invoke our jurisdiction bears the burden of proving that we have jurisdiction to decide the case. See David Dung Le, M.D., Inc. v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 268, 270 (2000), aff 'd, 22 Fed.Appx. 837 (9th Cir. 2001).
Petitioner has not supplied a copy of a notice of determination or a notice of deficiency for 2008. The Forms 4549-A and 886-A that petitioner attached to her Petition show that the IRS made certain concessions for 2008, reducing her 2008 tax liability following receipt of an offer-in-compromise. These documents do not indicate that any collection action has been taken against petitioner, and they do not otherwise suffice to confer jurisdiction on this Court. We therefore are compelled to grant respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.
Tax Court Rule 27(a) requires that certain information be kept confidential. The Petition and the response to the Motion both contain confidential taxpayer information, including Social Security numbers. We will therefore order these documents sealed from public view.
In consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the Petition, filed March 3, 2021, at docket entry #1, and petitioner's Response to Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, filed April 18, 2022, at docket entry #14, are sealed and not made part of the Court's public record in this case. The sealed documents shall be retained by the Court in a sealed file which shall not be opened for inspection by any person or entity except by Order of the Court. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, filed March 15, 2022, is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.