Opinion
16906-23S
04-16-2024
EDUARDO G. NUNEZ, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge.
On October 25, 2023, the Petition to commence this case was electronically filed by petitioner, seeking review of a notice of deficiency and a notice of determination concerning collection action issued for petitioner's 2020 tax year. On December 13, 2023, respondent filed the Answer, attaching thereto a copy of a notice of deficiency for tax year 2020. Respondent stated that respondent "was unable to confirm through United States Postal Service track and confirm that the notice of deficiency issued to Petitioner on July 10, 2023 using certified mail was in fact delivered to Petitioner." With respect to the notice of determination concerning collection action for tax year 2020 disputed in the Petition, the Answer states, "Denies as to the Notice of Determination Concerning Collection Action."
On March 29, 2024, the parties filed a Proposed Stipulated Decision. However, upon review of the record, it appears the Court may not properly have jurisdiction in this case.
Like all federal courts, the Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. Relevant to this case, our jurisdiction in a deficiency case depends on the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and the timely filing of a petition within 90 days of the issuance of the notice. See Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) § 6213(a); Hallmark Rsch. Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C. 126, 130, n.4 (2022) (collecting cases). Similarly, our jurisdiction in the collection due process context depends in part upon the issuance of a valid notice of determination concerning collection action. See §§ 6320(c), 6330(d)(1); Rule 330(b); Orum v. Commissioner, 123 T.C. 1, 8 (2004), aff 'd, 412 F.3d 819 (7th Cir. 2005); Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492, 498 (2000).
The copy of the notice of deficiency attached to the Answer is dated July 10, 2023, and provides that the last day to file a petition with the Tax Court was October 10, 2023. As noted above, the Petition was electronically filed on October 25, 2023. Accordingly, it appears that the Petition was not timely filed and, if not, this Court is without jurisdiction in this case. Likewise, although petitioner indicates on the Petition that he seeks review of a notice of determination concerning collection action, petitioner did not attach such notice to the Petition.
Upon due consideration, it is
ORDERED that, on or before May 7, 2024, respondent shall file a Response to this order and attach to it a copy of a postmarked United States Postal Service Form 3877, or other proof of mailing, showing respondent sent the deficiency notice disputed in this case to petitioner at his last known address by certified mail on or before July 10, 2023. It is further
ORDERED that, on or before May 7, 2024, petitioner and respondent each shall show cause, in writing, why the Court should not dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction, with respect to a notice of deficiency, on the grounds that the Petition was not timely filed. Petitioner shall attach to his response to this Order copies of all documents on which he relies to establish that the Petition in this case was timely filed. It is further
ORDERED that, on or before May 7, 2024, petitioner and respondent each shall show cause, in writing, why the Court should not dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction, with respect to a notice of determination concerning collection action, on the grounds that no notice of determination concerning collection action was issued to petitioner for tax year 2020 prior to the filing of the Petition. Petitioner shall attach to his response to this Order copies of all documents on which he relies to establish that he was issued a notice of determination concerning collection action for tax year 2020.
The Court will hold in abeyance the parties' Proposed Stipulated Decision pending resolution of the jurisdictional issues discussed above.