Opinion
1296-24S
06-10-2024
EMIL A. ESQUETINI, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On April 30, 2024, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the grounds that the Petition was not filed within the time prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code. On May 17, 2024, petitioner filed an objection to respondent's motion. Petitioner's objection does not address R's jurisdictional argument and instead focuses on the merits of the case. For the reasons that follow, we must grant respondent's Motion and dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.
Like all federal courts, the Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. Jurisdiction must be proven affirmatively, and a taxpayer invoking our jurisdiction bears the burden of proving that we have jurisdiction over the taxpayer's case. See Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975); Wheeler's Peachtree Pharmacy, Inc. v. Commissioner, 35 T.C. 177, 180 (1960). In a deficiency case, this Court's jurisdiction depends on the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and the timely filing of a petition 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). Hallmark Rsch. Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C. 126, 130 n.4 (2022); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988); see Sanders v. Commissioner, No. 15143-22, 161 T.C., slip op. at 7-8 (Nov. 2, 2023) (holding that the Court will continue treating the deficiency deadline as jurisdictional in cases appealable to jurisdictions outside the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit).
The notice of deficiency disputed in this case was mailed to petitioner's last known address on October 2, 2023. The 90th day after the date of mailing was Sunday, December 31, 2023; however, Internal Revenue Code section 6213(a) provides that Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays in the District of Columbia are not counted as the last day of the 90-day period. Hence, the last date to file a petition as to the notice of deficiency in this case was January 2, 2024, which date is printed on the notice as the last day to file a petition in this Court. The Court received and filed the Petition on January 23, 2024, and the postmeter mark on the envelope containing the Petition is dated January 18, 2024. Consequently, the Petition was not mailed or filed within the period prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code, and this case must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
We have no authority to extend the period for timely filing. See Hallmark Rsch. Collective, 159 T.C. at 167; Axe v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 256, 259 (1972); Joannou v. Commissioner, 33 T.C. 868, 869 (1960). However, although petitioner cannot prosecute this case in this Court, petitioner may still pursue an administrative resolution of petitioner's 2021 tax liability directly with the IRS.
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 because the Petition was not filed within the period prescribed by I.R.C. section 6213(a).