Opinion
14958-20
10-07-2022
WILLIAM B. ELLIMAN, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
L. Paige Marvel, Judge
On September 29, 2022, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (Motion to Dismiss), which petitioner does not oppose. In his Motion to Dismiss, respondent states that the Notice of Deficiency issued to petitioner on September 25, 2020, for petitioner's 2017 taxable year (Notice of Deficiency) is invalid by reason of section 6212(c) and that the Court therefore lacks jurisdiction under section 6213(a). Specifically, respondent states that respondent had already issued a notice of deficiency on January 6, 2020, for petitioner's 2017 taxable year, which petitioner had challenged in a petition filed on January 22, 2020, in another case docketed in this Court. See Docket No. 1382-20S. That case was resolved by a stipulated decision entered on May 6, 2020. Id. Respondent therefore contends that the Notice of Deficiency issued in this case for petitioner's same taxable year is invalid under section 6212(c), which provides in pertinent part that when a notice of deficiency is mailed to a taxpayer in accordance with section 6212(a) and the taxpayer timely files a petition with this Court in accordance with section 6213(a), respondent has "no right to determine any additional deficiency of income tax for the same taxable year," subject to certain enumerated exceptions that are not at issue in this case. See sec. 6212(c)(1). When a notice of deficiency is invalid, this Court lacks jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency contained in such a notice. See Frieling v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 42, 46 (1983). Rule 53 permits us to dismiss any case for cause upon motion of a party or upon the Court's initiative.
Unless otherwise indicated, all statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code, Title 26 U.S.C., in effect at all relevant times, all regulation references are to the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 26 (Treas. Reg.), in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
We agree with respondent's characterization. The record in the case at Docket No. 1382-20S clearly discloses that the parties have already litigated and settled via a stipulated decision a previous notice of deficiency that covered petitioner's income tax liability for the 2017 taxable year. In addition, the Notice of Deficiency in this case concerns only petitioner's income tax liability for the 2017 taxable year. "Where a taxpayer files a petition from a notice of deficiency, respondent has no authority to send the taxpayer a second notice for the same taxable year and tax liability . . . A valid petition is the basis of the Tax Court's jurisdiction. To be valid, a petition must be filed from a valid statutory notice." Stamm Int'l Corp. v. Commissioner, 84 T.C. 248, 252 (1985); see McCue v. Commissioner, 1 T.C. 986, 988 (1943). Because a previous notice of deficiency was sent to the same petitioner for the same tax liability and the same taxable year, we hold that we lack jurisdiction to hear this case because the notice of deficiency is invalid by reason of section 6212(c).
For the reasons stated above, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.