Opinion
7390-22S
01-12-2023
MARK SCOTT BOWEN, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge.
The petition in the above-docketed matter was filed on March 25, 2022, and 2017 was referenced as the taxable year in dispute. Attached to the petition was a notice of deficiency dated November 1, 2021, issued to petitioner with respect to the 2017 taxable year. An answer to the petition followed on April 18, 2022, but did not address jurisdictional matters. Thereafter, and unexpectedly given the state of the record, the parties on November 15, 2022, submitted a stipulated decision resolving the case.
Nonetheless, review of the record suggested a fundamental jurisdictional defect that would prevent entry of the just-referenced decision. At that juncture, the Court by Order served December 9, 2022, directed the parties, on or before December 29, 2022, to show cause in writing why this case should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, on the ground that the petition was not mailed to or filed with the Tax Court within the time prescribed by section 6213(a) or 7502 of the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.). The Order also noted that the date of the notice of deficiency underlying this proceeding for 2017 indicated a statutory deadline for filing a petition pursuant to section 6213(a), I.R.C., which expired on January 31, 2022, while attachments to the petition showed that it was initially sent to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in Ogden, Utah, received by the IRS on February 4, 2022, and subsequently re-sent to the Tax Court by the IRS.
On December 22, 2022, respondent filed a response to the Order To Show Cause, attaching supporting documentation in the form of a certified mail list to establish that the notice of deficiency was mailed on October 28, 2021. Respondent further concurred that the case should be dismissed as untimely. To date, no response has been received from petitioner.
This 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 a case seeking the 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), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Hallmark Research Collective v. Commissioner, No. 21284-21, 159 T.C. (Nov. 29, 2022); Brown v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 215, 220 (1982). In this regard, section 6213(a), I.R.C., provides that the petition must be filed with the Court 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). The Court has no authority to extend this 90-day (or 150-day) period. Joannou v. Commissioner, 33 T.C. 868, 869 (1960). However, a petition shall be treated as timely filed if it is filed on or before the last date specified in such notice for the filing of a Tax Court petition, a provision which becomes relevant where that date is later than the date computed with reference to the mailing date. Sec. 6213(a), I.R.C. Likewise, if the conditions of section 7502, I.R.C., are satisfied, a petition which is timely mailed may be treated as having been timely filed.
The premises considered, it is
ORDERED that the Court's Order To Show Cause, served December 9, 2022, is hereby made absolute. It is further
ORDERED that the Proposed Stipulated Decision, filed November 15, 2022, is hereby deemed stricken from the Court's record in this case.
ORDERED that, on the Court's own motion, this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.