Opinion
12158-21S
10-26-2022
JUDITH MARYELIZABETH MILLS & THOMAS WELLINGTON MILLS, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge.
On April 8, 2021, petitioners filed a petition to commence the instant case. Attached to the petition were, inter alia, (1) an IRS Notice CP2000 dated October 5, 2020, showing an amount due of $7,390.00 for petitioners' 2018 taxable year and (2) a notice of deficiency dated January 11, 2021, also for petitioners' 2018 taxable year. On August 19, 2021, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction on the ground that the notice of deficiency was invalid; petitioners had paid the $7,390.00 by check on November 4, 2020, prior to the issuance of the notice of deficiency. A copy of the check attached to respondent's motion showed petitioners' notation that it was being sent specifically in response to the IRS Notice CP2000.
Petitioners filed an objection to the motion to dismiss, expressing concern about the tax system and stating that they paid the amount due "by [the IRS] deadline to avoid accruing any more interest charges." Respondent filed a response to the objection, explaining that there was no indication that the payment was intended to be a cash bond or deposit. Given the totality of petitioners' submissions and the record of this case, there is nothing to suggest that the check was anything other than a payment sent in response to the IRS Notice CP2000. Thus, the notice of deficiency was not valid at the time it was issued.
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, and we may exercise that jurisdiction only to the extent authorized by Congress. Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). This Court's jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency depends on, among other things, the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency. See Rule 13(a), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989); Normac, Inc. v. Commissioner, 90 T.C. 142, 147 (1988). Accordingly, and for the reasons set forth in respondent's motion, it is
ORDERED that respondent's motion is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that no valid notice of deficiency was issued to petitioners in respect of their taxable year 2018.