Opinion
11716-24
09-26-2024
OCIEL MEJIA, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge
By Order to Show Cause served August 14, 2024, the Court directed the parties to show cause, on or before September 4, 2024, why the Court should not dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction on the grounds that the Petition was not filed within the time prescribed in the Internal Revenue Code. On August 22, 2024, respondent filed a response to the Court's Order, which, although titled as a Response to Order to Show Cause, was in substance a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Therein respondent agreed that this case should be dismissed on the grounds stated in the Court's Order to Show Cause. Petitioner filed no response to the Court's Order to Show Cause.
Like all federal courts, the Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. Jurisdiction must be proven affirmatively, and a taxpayer invoking our jurisdiction bears the burden of proving that we have jurisdiction over the taxpayer's case. See Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975); Wheeler's Peachtree Pharmacy, Inc. v. Commissioner, 35 T.C. 177, 180 (1960). In a deficiency case, this Court's jurisdiction depends on the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and the timely filing of a petition 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). Organic Cannabis Found., LLC v. Commissioner, 962 F.3d 1082 (9th Cir. 2020); Hallmark Rsch. Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C. 126, 130 n.4 (2022); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988); 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).
The record in this case establishes that the Petition was not timely filed and, accordingly, the Court is obliged to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. We have no authority to extend the period for timely filing. See Hallmark Rsch. Collective, 159 T.C. at 167; Axe v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 256, 259 (1972); Joannou v. Commissioner, 33 T.C. 868, 869 (1960). However, although petitioner cannot prosecute this case in this Court, petitioner may still pursue an administrative resolution of petitioner's 2021 tax liability directly with the IRS.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED that the above-referenced Order to Show Cause is made absolute. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Response to Order to Show Cause, filed August 22, 2024, is recharacterized as respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because the petition was not filed within the period prescribed by I.R.C. section 6213(a).