Opinion
12524-24
08-06-2024
KAMEEL GHASSAN ATWEH & MANDI SUE ATWEH, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On August 5, 2024, petitioners made two electronic filings with the Court, designating those filings as (1) petitioners' First Supplemental Motion to Dismiss at Docket Index No. 9 and (2) petitioners' Memorandum in Support of First Supplemental Motion to Dismiss at Docket Index No. 10. In their First Supplemental Motion to Dismiss, petitioners again request that the Court dismiss this case.
As the Court previously noted in our Order served August 5, 2024, denying petitioners' previous Motion to Dismiss, we are unable to simply dismiss petitioners' case without entering a decision. Under I.R.C. section 7459(d), if a petition has been filed in the Tax Court for a redetermination of a deficiency and the Court dismisses the case for any reason other than lack of jurisdiction, the Court must enter an order finding the deficiency in tax to be the amount determined by the Commissioner in his notice of deficiency, unless the Commissioner reduces the amount of his claim. Estate of Ming v. Commissioner, 62 T.C. 519, 522 (1974); see also Rule 123(d), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. Because petitioners have timely filed a Petition invoking our deficiency jurisdiction, if we were to dismiss this case as they request, we would be required to enter a decision finding a deficiency of $4,960 in petitioners' federal income tax for the taxable year 2022, as determined in the notice of deficiency upon which this case is based. Insofar as petitioners dispute the deficiency determination set forth in that notice of deficiency, we presume that a decision against petitioners sustaining that determination is not the result that they seek.
In view of the foregoing, we will deny petitioners' Motion. However, we again inform them that, to the extent they wish to pursue a settlement with the Internal Revenue Service as to the 2022 tax liability, they may contact the attorney who will be representing respondent (i.e., the IRS) in this matter. As previously noted in the Court's Order served August 5, 2024, the contact information for that attorney will be included in the answer that respondent files to the Petition. Respondent has 60 days from the date of service of the Petition within which to file the answer. Petitioners are informed that, typically, when the parties reach an agreement resolving all issues in a case, they will submit a stipulated decision document reflecting that agreement for entry by the Court. For further information, petitioners may consult "Guidance for Petitioners" under the "Rules and Guidance" tab on the Court's website at www.ustaxcourt.gov.
Upon due consideration and for cause, it is
ORDERED that petitioners' filing at Docket Index No. 9 is recharacterized as petitioners' First Amended Motion to Dismiss. It is further
ORDERED that petitioners' First Amended Motion to Dismiss is denied. It is further
ORDERED that petitioners' filing at Docket Index No. 10 is recharacterized as petitioners' Proposed Trial Exhibits. It is further
ORDERED that at this time no further action will be taken with respect to petitioners' Proposed Trial Exhibits.
Petitioners are informed that the above-referenced Proposed Trial Exhibits have not been received into evidence by the Court and that, unless otherwise directed by the Court, the appropriate time to present documentary evidence for inclusion in the Court's record is in connection with the trial, if any, in this matter.