Opinion
18551-21S
04-26-2022
PAUL T. OSEGUEDA & ROBIN OSEGUEDA, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Maurice B. Foley, Chief Judge
On March 23, 2022, respondent filed a Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the ground the petition was not filed timely as to the deficiency notice dated February 10, 2021, issued to petitioners for tax years 2018 and 2019. On April 19, 2022, petitioners filed their Objection to respondent's motion to dismiss.
The record reflects that respondent sent a notice of deficiency for 2018 and 2019 by certified mail to petitioners at their last known address on February 9, 2021. The 90-day period under I.R.C. section 6213(a) for filing a timely Tax Court petition as to that deficiency notice expired on May 11, 2021.
In their above Objection petitioners does not dispute the jurisdictional allegations set forth in respondent's motion to dismiss. Rather, petitioners assert they inadvertently mailed their petition to the wrong address, rather than to the Tax Court in Washington, D.C. Contrary to petitioners' argument, however, as discussed above, the record reflects the last date for petitioner to timely mail/timely file their Tax Court petition as to that deficiency notice for 2018 and 2019 expired on May 11, 2021. Petitioners failed to do so and filed their petition untimely. The Court has no authority to extend the statutory period for filing a timely petition. Axe v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 256, 259 (1972). Accordingly, we are obliged to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. I.R.C. secs. 6213(a), 7502; Brown v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 215, 220 (1982); Rule 13(c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
Petitioners cannot prosecute this case in this Court. However, petitioners may continue to pursue administrative resolution of their 2018 and 2019 tax liabilities directly with the Internal Revenue Service. Also, if financially feasible for them, petitioners may pay the tax, file a claim for refund with the Internal Revenue Service, and if the claim is denied, sue for a refund in the Federal district court or U.S. Court of Federal Claims. See McCormick v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 138, 142 (1970).
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, filed March 23, 2022, is granted and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.