Opinion
7645-22S
02-02-2023
JONES N. WILLIAMS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On March 31, 2022, petitioner filed the petition to commence this case, indicating therein that petitioner seeks review of a notice of determination concerning collection action issued for petitioner's 2019 tax year. Petitioner did not attach to the petition any notice of deficiency or notice of determination sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court.
On May 19, 2022, as to a notice of deficiency issued for petitioner's 2019 tax year, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the grounds that the petition was not filed within the time prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code. Although the Court provided petitioner an opportunity to file an objection, if any, to respondent's motion to dismiss, petitioner has not done so.
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. In a deficiency case, this Court's jurisdiction depends on the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and the timely filing of a petition within 90 days, or 150 days if the notice is addressed to a person outside the United States, after the notice of deficiency is mailed (not counting Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday in the District of Columbia as the last day). Rule 13(a), (c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Hallmark Research Collective v. Commissioner, No. 21284-21, 159 T.C. (Nov. 29, 2022); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988). Similarly, in a case seeking review of certain IRS collection activity, the Court's jurisdiction generally depends on the issuance of a valid notice of determination (after the taxpayer has requested a collection due process hearing) under Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) section 6320 or 6330 and the timely filing by the taxpayer of a petition within 30 days of that IRS determination. Smith v. Commissioner, 124 T.C. 36, 38 (2005); I.R.C. sec. 6320(c) and 6330(d)(1); Rule 330(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. 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."
The record in this case establishes that the petition was not timely filed as to the notice of deficiency issued for petitioner's 2019 tax year. Moreover, petitioner has failed to produce or otherwise demonstrate that he was issued any notice of determination concerning collection action for his 2019 tax year.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is recharacterized as a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to a Notice of Deficiency for Tax Year 2019. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to a Notice of Deficiency for Tax Year 2019 is granted in that so much of this case relating to a notice of deficiency for petitioner's 2019 tax year is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED that, on the Court's own motion, so much of this case relating to a notice of determination concerning collection action for petitioner's 2019 tax year is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.