Opinion
12680-23S
04-29-2024
GASPARD PIERRE LOUIS, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
KATHLEEN KERRIGAN CHIEF JUDGE.
On April 9, 2024, respondent filed in the above-docketed matter a Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, and a first supplement to the motion followed on April 29, 2024. The motion, as supplemented, sought dismissal on the ground that the petition herein was not filed within the time prescribed by the Internal Revenue Code. In the supplement in particular, respondent also addressed the inapplicability of relief on the basis of a disaster declaration or a military deployment and further indicated that petitioner had no objection to the granting of the 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. Hallmark Rsch. Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C. 126, 130, n.4 (2022) (collecting cases); Brown v. Commissioner, 78 T.C. 215, 220 (1982); see Sanders v. Commissioner, No. 15143-22, 161 T.C., slip op. at 7-8 (Nov. 2, 2023) (holding that the Court will continue treating the deficiency deadline as jurisdictional in cases appealable to jurisdictions outside the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit). 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. Hallmark Rsch. Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C. at 166-67; 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.
A petition is ordinarily "filed" when it is received by the Tax Court in Washington, D.C. See, e.g., Leventis v. Commissioner, 49 T.C. 353, 354 (1968). Although the Court may sit at any place within the United States, its principal office, its mailing address, and its Clerk's office are in the District of Columbia. Sec. 7445, I.R.C.; Rule 10, Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. And a document that is electronically filed with the Court is filed when it is received by the Court as determined in reference to where the Court is located. Nutt v. Commissioner, No. 15959-22, 160 T.C. (May 2, 2023).
The record shows that the petition was not timely filed.
Upon due consideration, 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 because the petition was not filed within the period prescribed by section 6213(a), I.R.C. It is further
ORDERED that the Proposed Stipulated Decision, filed March 18, 2024, is hereby deemed stricken from the Court's record in this case.