Opinion
23725-21
10-03-2022
WILLIAM STACEY HARVEY, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
The petition to commence this case was filed September 22, 2021. No notice of deficiency or notice of determination is attached to the petition. On January 3, 2022, petitioner filed a response to the Court's Order served December 13, 2021, and attached thereto a copy of a Decision Letter on Equivalent Hearing Under Internal Revenue Sections 6320 and/or 6330, dated August 26, 2021.
This Court's jurisdiction in a collection case generally depends, in part, upon the issuance of a notice of determination under section 6320 or 6330. Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) secs. 6320(c), 6330(d)(1); Rule 330(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492 (2000). But we have recognized that a decision letter issued after a timely request for a hearing under section 6330 "is a 'determination' for purposes of section 6330(d)(1)," regardless of the label on the document. Craig v. Commissioner, 119 T.C. 252, 259 (2002).
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that the caption of this case is amended by adding the letter "L" to the docket number. It is further
ORDERED that the Clerk of the Court shall add the letter "L" to the docket sheet and other records of her office and process this case to trial or other disposition according to the Lien and Levy Action Procedures provided by Rules 330 et seq., Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. It is further
ORDERED that, on or before October 28 2022, the parties shall each file a response to this Order and therein set forth and fully discuss whether, pursuant to Craig v. Commissioner, they intend to proceed in this case as if the above-referenced decision letter is tantamount to a notice of determination under section 6320 or 6330 and, if not, the reasons therefor.