Opinion
8686-20S
02-08-2023
CHARLES DANIEL KING, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On October 18, 2021, respondent filed in the above-docketed case a Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, and a first supplement to the motion followed on November 17, 2021. In the motion, as supplemented, respondent sought dismissal on the ground that the petition was not executed or filed by petitioner or an appropriate representative on his behalf, nor had it since been ratified by a fiduciary or personal representative duly appointed by a court of competent jurisdiction and legally entitled to institute a case on behalf of Charles Daniel King, Deceased, or his estate. Although the Court directed petitioner (or other appropriate representative) to file an objection, if any, to respondent's motion, as supplemented, nothing further has been received.
The burden of proving that the Court has jurisdiction is on the taxpayer, and unless the petition is filed by the taxpayer or someone lawfully authorized to act on his or her behalf, the Court lacks jurisdiction. Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975).
The premises considered, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, as supplemented, is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED that, in addition to regular service, the Clerk of the Court shall serve a copy of this Order on Chrystal D. King at 304 Oakwood Ave., Raeford, N.C. 28376.