Opinion
3779-24S
05-08-2024
PHYLLIS I. ATKINSON & ROBERT SILVA, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge.
On March 4, 2024, petitioners filed the Petition to commence this case, indicating therein that they seek review of a notice of deficiency issued for their 2015 tax year. On March 21, 2024, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the grounds that (1) as to petitioner Phyllis I. Atkinson, respondent issued no notice of deficiency nor made any other determination sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court with respect to Ms. Atkinson's 2015 tax year, and (2) as to petitioner Robert Silva, the Petition was not filed within the time prescribed by Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) section 6213(a). Although the Court provided petitioners the opportunity to file an objection to respondent's Motion, petitioners have not done so.
Like all federal courts, the Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. 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). 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). Pugsley v. Commissioner, 749 F.2d 691 (11th Cir. 1985); see also Allen v. Commissioner, 2022 WL 17825934 (11th Cir. 2022); Hallmark Rsch. Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C. 126, 130 n.4 (2022); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988); see Sanders v. Commissioner, No. 15143-22, 161 T.C., slip op. at 7-8 (Nov. 2, 2023) (holding that the Court will continue treating the deficiency deadline as jurisdictional in cases appealable to jurisdictions outside the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit).
The record in this case establishes that, as to petitioner Robert Silva, the Petition was not timely filed. Furthermore, as to petitioner Phyllis I. Silva, petitioners have not demonstrated that respondent issued any notice of deficiency or made any other determination as to her 2015 tax year that would permit Ms. Silva to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, the Court is obliged to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. However, although petitioners cannot prosecute this case in this Court, petitioners may still pursue an administrative resolution of their 2015 tax liability directly with the Internal Revenue Service.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.