Opinion
5238-22
04-13-2023
DONALD ECRET & KRISTEN ECRET, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
Albert G. Lauber, Judge.
This case is calendared for trial during the Court's June 12, 2023, remote trial session. On February 21, 2023, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS or respondent) filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to petitioners' 2018 tax year. By Order served February 28, 2023, we directed petitioners to file a Response to the Motion on or before March 30, 2023. Petitioners did not respond to that Order by the date specified or subsequently.
On August 9, 2021, the IRS mailed, by certified mail to their last known address, a notice of deficiency for petitioners' 2018 tax year. That notice correctly stated that the last date on which they could timely petition this Court was November 8, 2021. On November 22, 2021, the IRS mailed, by certified mail to their last known address, a notice of deficiency for petitioners' 2019 tax year. That notice correctly stated that the last date on which they could timely petition this Court was February 22, 2022. On February 22, 2022, the Court received from petitioners, and filed as a petition in this case, a letter stating that they were "responding to the ongoing income tax disputes from 2018 and 2019 respectively." That letter was contained in an envelope postmarked February 14, 2022.
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). Jurisdiction must be proven affirmatively, and a taxpayer invoking our jurisdiction bears the burden of proving that we have jurisdiction over the case. Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975).
In a deficiency case, this Court's jurisdiction depends on the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and a timely filed petition. Tax Court Rule 13(a) and (c); Hallmark Research Collective v. Commissioner, No. 21284-21, 159 T.C., slip op. at 2 (Nov. 29, 2022); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989). For taxpayers in the United States, the petition must be filed with the Court within 90 days of the mailing of the notice of deficiency (not counting Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday in the District of Columbia as the last day). I.R.C. § 6213(a). If a petition is timely mailed and properly addressed to the Tax Court in Washington, D.C., it will be considered timely filed. See § I.R.C. 7502(a)(1). In order for the "timely mailing/timely filing" provision to apply, the envelope containing the petition must bear a postmark with a date that is on or before the last date for timely filing of the petition. See I.R.C. § 7502(a)(2).
Petitioners' letter, which the Court filed as a petition, was filed 90 days after the notice of deficiency for 2019 was issued to them, and their petition was thus timely as to 2019. But their letter was postmarked 190 days, and filed 198 days, after the notice of deficiency for 2018 was issued to them. Their petition was thus untimely as to 2018. Furthermore, petitioners have not produced any evidence that respondent made any other determination as to their 2018 tax year that would permit them to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court for that year. Accordingly, we are obliged to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction insofar as it concerns petitioners' tax liability for 2018.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to the 2018 tax year is granted in that so much of this case as relates to tax year 2018 is dismissed and deemed stricken from the Court's record in this case.