Opinion
14092-22S
02-13-2023
JAMIE LEEANN ASHTON, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Diana L. Leyden, Special Trial Judge
This case is calendared for trial at the April 11, 2023, San Antonio, Texas, Trial Session of the Court.
On June 8, 2022, the Petition commencing this case was filed. Petitioner seeks review of a notice of deficiency dated February 28, 2022, issued for the taxable year 2018. Attached to the Petition is a copy of the February 28, 2022, notice of deficiency issued for 2018, which states the last day for filing a timely Tax Court petition is May 31, 2022. The Petition, filed June 8, 2022, arrived at the Court in an envelope bearing no postmark. An examination of the petition and the envelope in which the petition arrived suggests that the petition in this case was not filed timely as of May 31, 2022.
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. It may exercise its jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute. Breman v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 61, 66 (1976). In a case seeking redetermination of a deficiency, the jurisdiction of the Court depends, in part, on the timely filing of a petition by the taxpayer. Rule 13(c). A petition is timely if filed within 90 days of the mailing of the notice of deficiency. I.R.C. § 6213(a). If a petition is not timely filed, the Court does not have jurisdiction to redetermine the IRS' deficiency determination. Hallmark Research Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C. No. 6 (November 29, 2022).
Upon due consideration and for cause, it is
ORDERED that, on or before March 8, 2023, respondent shall file a response to this Order and attach thereto, a postmarked U.S. Postal Service Form 3877, or other proof of mailing, showing the February 28, 2022, deficiency notice for 2018, upon which this case is based, was sent by certified or registered mail to petitioner at his last known address on or about February 28, 2022. It is further
ORDERED that on or before March 8, 2023, the parties shall show cause, in writing, why the Court, on its own motion, should not dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that the petition was not timely filed.