Opinion
1038-24
08-12-2024
MILDRED R. SABELLA, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
ORDER
Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge
On January 17, 2024, correspondence from or on behalf of petitioner, not accompanied by payment of the Court's filing fee, was filed as a petition to commence the above-docketed case. By Order served January 23, 2024, the Court directed petitioner to pay the Court's $60.00 filing fee or submit an application for waiver thereof. No response to the Court's Order was received. By Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction entered March 15, 2024, this case was dismissed for petitioner's failure to pay the filing fee as directed by the Court.
Subsequently, on August 8, 2024, the Court received from petitioner a letter dated August 3, 2024, which is in the nature of a Motion To Vacate Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction. Therein, petitioner asked that the case be reopened. Petitioner explained that she did not pay the filing fee because she spoke to an IRS employee in February, 2024, and was told that her case was closed, which she understood to mean that she no longer needed to pursue the case she had brought in this Court. However, the United States Tax Court is separate and independent from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS); petitioner's administrative case with the IRS was not part of her case before this Court.
Except for very limited exceptions, none of which applies here, this Court lacks jurisdiction once a decision becomes final within the meaning of section 7481 of the Internal Revenue Code (I.R.C.). Stewart v. Commissioner, 127 T.C. 109, 112 (2006). A reviewable decision of the Tax Court becomes final "[u]pon the expiration of the time allowed for filing a notice of appeal, if no such notice has been duly filed within such time". I.R.C. §7481(a)(1). A notice of appeal may be filed within 90 days after a decision is entered. I.R.C. §7483. An order of dismissal for lack of jurisdiction is treated as the Court's decision. Stewart, 127 T.C. at 111.
The Court's Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction in this case was entered on March 15, 2024, and thus became final on June 13, 2024. As noted above, petitioner did not file a motion to vacate or otherwise communicate with the Court until August 8, 2024. Because petitioner did not file the motion (or pay the filing fee) until after the Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction had become final, the Court's decision in this case cannot be vacated. See, e.g., Golditch v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-237.
That being so, it is
ORDERED that petitioner's letter dated August 3, 2024, is recharacterized as a Motion To Vacate Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction. It is further
ORDERED that petitioner's just-referenced Motion To Vacate Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction is denied, and this case remains closed.