Opinion
13528-20
01-24-2022
ROBERT S. REID, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Maurice B. Foley Chief Judge
Pending before the Court is respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, filed March 3, 2021. Therein, respondent requests that this case be dismissed on the ground that the Petition was not filed within the time prescribed by the Internal Revenue Code. On April 5, 2021, petitioner filed an Objection to the Motion. For the reasons set forth below, we will grant respondent's Motion and dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.
Background
The Petition in this case seeks review of a Notice of Final Determination for Full Disallowance of Interest Abatement Claim, issued to petitioner with respect to the 2010 and 2011 taxable years. The Notice of Final Determination, dated May 20, 2020, states that any petition requesting review of respondent's denial therein must be filed "with the Tax Court within 180 days from the date of this notice." The Petition was received by the Court and filed on November 19, 2020. The Petition arrived at the Court in a U.S. Postal Service Priority Mail Express envelope bearing a postmark of November 18, 2020.
Discussion
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, and we may exercise our jurisdiction only to the extent authorized by Congress. See I.R.C. § 7442; Guralnik v. Commissioner, 146 T.C. 230, 235 (2016). Where, as here, this Court's jurisdiction is duly challenged, the jurisdiction must be affirmatively shown by the party seeking to invoke that jurisdiction. See David Dung Le, M.D., Inc. v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 268, 270 (2000), aff'd, 22 Fed.Appx. 837 (9th Cir. 2001); Romann v. Commissioner, 111 T.C. 273, 280 (1998); Fehrs v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 346, 348 (1975). To meet this burden, that party "must establish affirmatively all facts giving rise to our jurisdiction." David Dung Le, M.D., Inc., 114 T.C. at 270.
Section 6404(h)(1) confers jurisdiction on this Court to review the Secretary's failure to abate interest:
All statutory references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect at all relevant times, and all Rule references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.
(1) In general.-The Tax Court shall have jurisdiction over any action brought by a taxpayer who meets the requirements referred to in section 7430(c)(4)(A)(ii) to determine whether the Secretary's failure to abate interest under this section was an abuse of discretion, and may order an abatement, if such action is brought-
(A) at any time after the earlier of-
(i) the date of the mailing of the Secretary's final determination not to abate such interest, or
(ii) the date which is 180 days after the date of the filing with the Secretary (in such form as the Secretary may prescribe) of a claim for abatement under this section, and
(B) not later than the date which is 180 days after the date described in subparagraph (A)(i).
Accordingly, a taxpayer must file his petition within 180 days after the mailing to the taxpayer's last known address of the Secretary's notice of final determination not to abate interest. Id.; Rule 280(b); Gati v. Commissioner, 113 T.C. 132 (1999) (dismissing untimely petition); see also I.R.C. § 7502.
There is no dispute in this case that respondent mailed the Notice of Final Determination to petitioner on May 20, 2020. In addition, petitioner does not contend that respondent failed to mail the Notice of Final Determination to petitioner's last known address. Accordingly, the 180-day filing period prescribed by section 6404(h)(1) expired on Monday, November 16, 2020, a date that was not a legal holiday in the District of Columbia. As noted, the Petition in this case was not mailed until November 18, 2020, and was received and filed by the Court on November 19, 2020. Consequently, the Petition was not timely filed.
In his Objection, petitioner appears to misunderstand the applicable filing deadline in this case, insofar as he argues: "I originally overnighted my petition to have my case heard in United States tax court and it was entered into your system on 11/19/2020, so it was in your system BEFORE the 6 month deadline that I was given on May 20th by the IRS. (11/20/2020)".
As noted above, the applicable deadline is 180 days from the date of mailing of the Notice of Final Determination, as stated therein, not six months, and the Petition in this case is therefore untimely. While the Court is sympathetic to petitioner's situation, governing law recognizes no exceptions for good cause or similar grounds that would allow him to proceed in this judicial forum. As petitioner has failed to "establish affirmatively all facts giving rise to our jurisdiction", David Dung Le, M.D., Inc., 114 T.C. at 270, we must dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.
Upon due consideration of the foregoing, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.