Opinion
24075-22S
03-24-2023
JOHN RICHARD DRYER & ADRIANA C. DRYER, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge
On October 31, 2022, petitioners filed the petition in this case, indicating that they seek review of a notice of deficiency issued to them for their 2021 tax year. Petitioners attached to the petition a copy of an IRS Notice CP 23 issued to them with respect to their 2021 tax year.
On January 5, 2023, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the ground that no notice of deficiency was issued to petitioners, nor has respondent made any other determination, concerning petitioners' 2021 tax year that would permit petitioners to invoke this Court's jurisdiction. Although the Court provided petitioners the opportunity to file an objection, if any, to respondent's motion, petitioners have 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 a timely filed petition. 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 depends on the issuance of a valid notice of determination (after the taxpayer has properly requested a collection due process hearing) under Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) section 6320 or 6330 and the filing by the taxpayer of a petition concerning 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.
Here, petitioners have not demonstrated that they were issued any notice of deficiency, or that respondent has made any other determination, concerning their 2021 tax year sufficient to confer jurisdiction upon this Court. A Notice CP 23 is not a notice of deficiency or notice of determination that permits the recipients to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court.
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.