Opinion
26833-22S
03-27-2023
TAMI SUZANNE SHIRAH & DANNIE MICHAEL SHIRAH, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On February 21, 2023, respondent filed in the above-docketed case a Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to Dannie Michael Shirah, on the ground that no statutory notice of deficiency, as authorized by section 6212 and required by section 6213(a) of the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) to form the basis for a petition to this Court, had been sent to petitioner Dannie Michael Shirah with respect to the taxable year 2018, nor had respondent made any other determination with respect to Dannie Michael Shirah's tax year 2018 that would confer jurisdiction on this Court.
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. It may therefore exercise jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute. Breman v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 61, 66 (1976). In a case seeking the redetermination of a deficiency, the jurisdiction of the Court depends, in part, on the issuance by the Commissioner of a valid notice of deficiency to the taxpayer. Rule 13(c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Frieling v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 42, 46 (1983). The notice of deficiency has been described as "the taxpayer's ticket to the Tax Court" because without it, there can be no prepayment judicial review by this Court of the deficiency determined by the Commissioner. Mulvania v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 65, 67 (1983).
Petitioners were served with a copy of respondent's motion to dismiss and, on March 22, 2023, filed a notice of objection. Therein, petitioners did not deny the jurisdictional allegations set forth in respondent's motion and did not suggest the existence of any notice of deficiency or other relevant determination issued to Dannie Michael Shirah. Rather, the objection, in conjunction with the earlier petition and its attachments, centered on an overarching desire to proceed on the basis of joint filing status and to have the taxes computed on a joint basis. To buttress petitioners' position, the submissions referenced circumstances such as having been married at all relevant times, having filed joint returns, and having received communications from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) consistent with agency awareness of a joint account. Petitioners particularly highlighted that a joint amended 2018 return had been sent to the IRS, but had not been processed, at the time the petition underlying this proceeding had been filed. Thus, the record would seem to reflect that because petitioners had initially failed to file timely a 2018 tax return, the notice of deficiency had been based solely on analysis of Tami Suzanne Shirah's gross income, without taking into account, inter alia, joint marital status and various expenses and deductions.
Unfortunately, while the Court may be sympathetic to petitioners' situation, suffice it to say that none of petitioners' apparent positions or contentions can provide a basis in these circumstances to allow Dannie Michael Shirah to remain a litigant in this case. Jurisdiction strictly pursuant to the governing statutes is fundamental in this Court of law. It is only the existence of a notice issued to a taxpayer, not his or her status as married to or filing joint returns with another taxpayer, that permits participation as a named party in a Tax Court proceeding. Whether this case might eventually be settled between the parties in a manner largely consistent with joint filing status remains an open question but does not alter the fact that no notice was issued to Dannie Michael Shirah to serve as his "ticket to the Tax Court".
Accordingly, the record in this case fails to establish that a notice of deficiency or any other notice sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court was sent to Dannie Michael Shirah with respect to the taxable year 2018. This case must therefore be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to Dannie Michael Shirah.
The premises considered, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to Dannie Michael Shirah is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to Dannie Michael Shirah. It is further
ORDERED that the caption of this case is amended to read "Tami Suzanne Shirah, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent".