Opinion
9575-23
12-19-2023
VIVIANE F. TALOM & GUY M. TALOM, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge
On June 6, 2023, petitioners filed the Petition to commence this case, indicating therein that with respect that they seek review with respect to a notice of deficiency issued for their 2023 tax year. However, petitioners attached to their petition a notice of deficency issued for their 2020 tax year.
On June 27, 2023, respondent filed an Answer to the Petition. In that Answer, respondent denies that petitioners' 2023 tax year is properly at issue in this case. However, respondent has not filed an appropriate jurisdictional motion as to petitioners' 2023 tax year.
The Tax 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 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). Furthermore, in relevant part, Rule 149(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure, states: "Failure to produce evidence, in support of an issue of fact as to which a party has the burden of proof and which has not been conceded by such party's adversary, may be ground for dismissal or for determination of the affected issue against that party."
On December 18, 2023, the parties submitted a Proposed Stipulated Decision in which only the deficiency for petitioners' 2020 tax year is addressed. Petitioners have not produced or otherwise demonstrated that they were issued any notice of deficiency for their 2023 tax year.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that, on the Court's own motion, so much of this case relating to a notice of deficiency for petitioners' 2023 tax year is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and deemed stricken from the Court's record in this case.