Opinion
1982-21
04-22-2022
CHUCK PATTISON & C. ZDANOWSKI-PATTISON, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Joseph W. Nega Judge
This deficiency case is currently calendared for trial at the session of the Court to be conducted remotely commencing May 23, 2022, for cases in which in Buffalo, New York is listed as the place of trial. On March 4, 2022, respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to 2018 (respondent's motion). On April 12, 2022, petitioners filed a Response to Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to 2018 (petitioners' response).
Unless otherwise indicated, all statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code, Title 26 U.S.C., in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
In respondent's motion, respondent seeks dismissal with respect to tax year 2018 on the ground that no valid statutory notice of deficiency was issued to petitioners for that year. Respondent represents that he diligently searched his records and contacted Internal Revenue Service (IRS) personnel but found no record, information, or other evidence indicating that a notice of deficiency was issued to petitioners. Respondent represents that petitioners have not produced or demonstrated the existence of a notice of deficiency or other determination sufficient to confer jurisdiction on this Court. In petitioners' response, petitioners represent that they agree with respondent's motion.
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction and may exercise jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute. Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). This Court's jurisdiction to redetermine a deficiency in income tax depends on: (1) the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency; and (2) the timely filing of a petition with the Court by the taxpayer. § 6213(a); Rule 13(a), (c); Monge v. Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989). The parties agree that no notice of deficiency was issued to petitioners for tax year 2018. Thus, we lack jurisdiction with respect to tax year 2018. Accordingly, we will grant respondent's motion and dismiss this case as to tax year 2018 for lack of jurisdiction.
Upon due consideration and for cause, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction as to 2018, filed March 4, 2022, is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction as to tax year 2018. All references to tax year 2018 in the Petition are deemed stricken.