Opinion
8987-21S
02-04-2022
Emmanuel Frias Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Respondent
ORDER
Lewis R. Carluzzo Chief Special Trial Judge
According to respondent there is an overpayment in petitioner's 2019 Federal income tax. In his motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, filed January 10, 2022, and amended on January 24, 2022, respondent requests that the Court enter a decision that shows that overpayment. The Court is authorized to do so in this case only if it finds certain facts otherwise supported in the record. See I.R.C. section 6512(b)(3). Apparently respondent has requested that petitioner enter into a stipulation that establishes those facts, but petitioner has failed or refused to respond to respondent's request.
Premises considered, it is
ORDERED that respondent's motion to dismiss, as amended will be taken under advisement. It is further
ORDERED that as soon as practical after being served with this Order, respondent once again attempt to obtain petitioner's agreement to the necessary stipulation. It is further
ORDERED that unless a proposed stipulated decision is submitted sooner, on or before March 18, 2022, the parties report in writing to the Court as to the status of the case.
Petitioner is advised that his failure or refusal to enter into the stipulation requested by respondent that would allow for the Court to order an overpayment in his 2019 Federal income tax could result in the forfeiture of any refund due to petitioner. The Court will take further action in this case as it deems appropriate.