Opinion
30188-21
03-29-2022
Jeffrey Kruk, Deceased Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue Respondent
ORDER
Maurice B. Foley Chief Judge
On September 8, 2021, a petition was filed to commence the above-docketed matter on behalf of Jeffrey Kruk, Deceased. Although that document was signed only by Gary L. Figurski, a representative not admitted to practice before this Court, it indicated dispute of an attached notice of deficiency for taxable year 2018 issued to Jeffrey Kruk.
Subsequently, on December 16, 2021, respondent filed a Motion Change or Correct Caption, advising that Danny Howard had been appointed personal representative for the Estate of Jeffrey Joseph Kruk, Deceased, as reflected in Letters of Authority, dated August 17, 2021, issued by the State of Michigan Probate Court for Wayne County.
In general, Rule 60(a) of the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure directs that a case shall be brought by the individual against whom a deficiency or liability has been asserted or by a fiduciary legally authorized to institute a case on behalf of such person. 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).
Accordingly, upon due consideration of the foregoing and the record herein, it is
ORDERED that respondent's just-referenced Motion To Change or Correct Caption is granted in that it is further
ORDERED that "Estate of Jeffrey Kruk, Deceased, Danny Howard, Personal Representative" is substituted for "Jeffrey Kruk, Deceased" as a party petitioner. It is further
ORDERED that the caption of this case is amended to read "Estate of Jeffrey Kruk, Deceased, Danny Howard, Personal Representative, Petitioner v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, Respondent". It is further
ORDERED that, on or before April 28, 2022, Danny Howard shall file with the Court a Ratification of Petition, bearing his original signature (preferably in blue ink), in which petitioner states, if such be the case, that he has read the petition filed September 8, 2021, and ratifies and affirms the filing of said document. If no such Ratification of Petition is received by that date, the Court may dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. Danny Howard should note that the Ratification of Petition may NOT be filed electronically, and the Tax Court, unlike the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), does NOT recognize powers of attorney. It is further
ORDERED that the time within which petitioner shall pay the Court's $60.00 filing fee (or submit an Application for Waiver of Filing Fee form, which is available under the "eFiling & Case Maintenance" tab on the Court's website, www.ustaxcourt.gov), is extended to April 28, 2022. If the filing fee (or proper application for waiver) is not received by that date, the Court may dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. 1