Opinion
3827-24S
06-14-2024
SHARON RUSHING, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
Kathleen Kerrigan, Chief Judge
The above-docketed matter is before the Court on the Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, filed April 22, 2024, by respondent herein. Respondent's motion is based upon the ground that the Petition, which seeks relief from a joint federal income tax liability pursuant to section 6015 of the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.) of 1986, as amended, was not filed within the period prescribed by section 6015(e), I.R.C. Although the Court directed petitioner to file an objection, if any, to respondent's motion, petitioner has failed to do so.
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. It may therefore exercise jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute. Breman v. Commissioner, 66 T.C. 61, 66 (1976). In a case such as this one, the jurisdiction of the Court depends, in part, on the timely filing of a petition by the taxpayer, and section 6015(e)(1), I.R.C., specifically provides that the petition, to be timely, must be filed within 90 days of the notice of determination. "The 90-day filing deadline of section 6015(e)(1)(A) is jurisdictional." Frutiger v. Commissioner, No. 31153-21, 162 T.C., slip op. at 12 (Mar. 11, 2024). Furthermore, the Court has no authority to extend this 90-day period. See id.; Pollack v. Commissioner, 132 T.C. 21, 32 (2009) ("[S]ection 6015(e)(1)(A)'s 90-day limit is jurisdictional and therefore doesn't allow for equitable tolling . . . ."). However, if the conditions of section 7502, I.R.C., are satisfied, a petition which is timely mailed may be treated as having been timely filed.
A petition is ordinarily "filed" when it is received by the Tax Court in Washington, D.C. See, e.g., Leventis v. Commissioner, 49 T.C. 353, 354 (1968). Although the Court may sit at any place within the United States, its principal office, its mailing address, and its Clerk's office are in the District of Columbia. Sec. 7445, I.R.C.; Rule 10, Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure. And a document that is electronically filed with the Court is filed when it is received by the Court as determined in reference to where the Court is located. Nutt v. Commissioner, No. 15959-22, 160 T.C. (May 2, 2023).
The record shows that the Petition was not timely filed.
Upon due consideration, it is
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 section 6015(e), I.R.C.