Opinion
2633-22
04-10-2023
GUSTAVO PEREZ GARCIA, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Elizabeth Crewson Paris Judge.
This case is calendared for trial at the Court's May 8, 2023, Omaha, Nebraska Trial Session.
On January 24, 2022, the petitioner filed the petition commencing this case attached thereto a copy of the Notice of Deficiency, dated January 3, 2022, reflecting an increase in income tax (deficiency) for the taxable year 2019. The petitioner did not attach, nor did he list on the first page of the petition, the Notice of Deficiency for the taxable year 2018. The petitioner did however state on page two (2) of his petition that he had two (2) Notice of Deficiencies for taxable years 2018 and 2019.
On April 4, 2023, docket entry 9, respondent filed with the Court filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to the 2018 Tax Year which requests that this case, insofar as it relates to the taxable year 2018, be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction upon the ground that the petition was not filed within the time prescribed by I.R.C. § 6213(a). On December 7, 2020, respondent sent by certified mail a Notice of Deficiency regarding the 2018 tax year to petitioner's last known address, as shown by the postmark date stamped on PS Form 3877; a duplicate of the postmark date stamped on PS Form 3877 bearing the certified mail article number matching the number shown on the Notice of Deficiency attached to the petition, and a copy of the Notice of Deficiency are attached thereto.
Respondent's Motion indicates that the 90-day period for timely filing a petition with this Court from the Notice of Deficiency expired on March 8, 2021, which date was not a Saturday, a Sunday, or a legal holiday in the District of Columbia. The petition was filed with the Tax Court on January 24, 2022, which date is 412 days after the mailing of the Notice of Deficiency. The U.S. Postmark stamped on the envelope in which the petition was mailed to the Court is January 19, 2022, which date is 407 days after the mailing date of the Notice of Deficiency. The petition for redetermination of the deficiency for the 2018 tax year was not filed with the Court within the time prescribed by I.R.C. § 6213(a). Respondent diligently searched his records and has determined that no other determination has been made by respondent that would confer jurisdiction upon this Court with respect to petitioner's income tax liabilities for the taxable year 2018. Respondent's Motion indicates that the petitioner does not object to the granting of this motion.
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). In a case seeking the redetermination of a deficiency, the jurisdiction of the Court depends, in part, on the timely filing of a petition by the taxpayer. Rule 13(c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Hallmark Research Collective v. Commissioner, No. 21284-21, 159 T.C. (Nov. 29, 2022); Brown v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 215, 220 (1982). In this regard, section 6213(a), I.R.C., provides that the petition must be filed with the Court 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). The Court has no authority to extend this 90-day (or 150-day) period. Joannou v. Commissioner, 33 T.C. 868, 869 (1960). However, a petition shall be treated as timely filed if it is filed on or before the last date specified in such notice for the filing of a Tax Court petition, a provision which becomes relevant where that date is later than the date computed with reference to the mailing date. Sec. 6213(a), I.R.C. Likewise, if the conditions of section 7502, I.R.C., are satisfied, a petition which is timely mailed may be treated as having been timely filed.
After due consideration, and for cause, 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 relating to taxable year 2018 is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction and deemed stricken from the Court's record in this case.