From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wielicki v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

United States Tax Court
Aug 3, 2022
No. 4673-22S (U.S.T.C. Aug. 3, 2022)

Opinion

4673-22S

08-03-2022

PETER J. WIELICKI & ANNE K. WIELICKI, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent


ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

Kathleen Kerrigan Chief Judge

On February 14, 2022, and March 7, 2022, petitioners submitted to the Court two petitions each contesting the taxable years 2016 and 2020, which were filed at Docket Nos. 4673-22S and 4022-22S. Thereafter, on March 28, 2022, respondent filed a Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction at Docket No. 4022-22S and on May 3, 3022, filed a Motion To Close on Ground of Duplication at Docket No. 4673-22S. Petitioners then filed substantially identical objections to both motions on May 31, 2022, and June 1, 2022, respectively.

Insofar as no notice of deficiency or determination had been issued to petitioners for either 2016 or 2020 at the times the two petitions were filed with the Court, and petitioners have at no time referenced or attached any such notice, jurisdiction is lacking in both cases. To wit, 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 seeking the redetermination of a deficiency, the jurisdiction of the Court depends, in part, on the issuance by the Commissioner of a valid notice of deficiency to the taxpayer. Rule 13(c), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Frieling v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 42, 46 (1983). The notice of deficiency has been described as "the taxpayer's ticket to the Tax Court" because without it, there can be no prepayment judicial review by this Court of the deficiency determined by the Commissioner. Mulvania v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 65, 67 (1983).

Similarly, this Court's jurisdiction in a case seeking review of a determination concerning collection action under section 6320 or 6330, I.R.C., depends, in part, upon the issuance of a valid notice of determination by the IRS Office of Appeals under section 6320 or 6330, I.R.C. Secs. 6320(c) and 6330(d)(1), I.R.C.; Rule 330(b), Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure; Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492 (2000). A condition precedent to the issuance of a notice of determination is the requirement that a taxpayer have requested a hearing before the IRS Office of Appeals in reference to an underlying Notice of Federal Tax Lien Filing and Your Right to a Hearing Under IRC 6320, Final Notice of Intent To Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing (or the equivalent Notice CP90, Intent to seize your assets and notice of your right to a hearing, depending on the version of the form used), or analogous post-levy notice of hearing rights under section 6330(f), I.R.C. (e.g., a Notice of Levy on Your State Tax Refund and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing).

Other types of IRS notice which may form the basis for a petition to the Tax Court, likewise under statutorily prescribed parameters, include a Notice of Final Determination Concerning Your Request for Relief From Joint and Several Liability, a Notice of Final Determination Not To Abate Interest, a Notice of Determination of Worker Classification, Notice of Certification of Your Seriously Delinquent Federal Tax Debt to the State Department, or a Notice of Final Determination Concerning Whistleblower Action. No pertinent claims involving section 6015, 6404(h), 7436, 7345, or 7623, I.R.C., respectively, have been implicated here. Similarly absent is any suggestion that the perquisites have been met to support one of the statutorily described declaratory judgment actions that may be undertaken by the Court.

An Order of Dismissal for Lack of Jurisdiction, also explaining at some length the relevant law, was entered in Docket No. 4022-22S on July 13, 2022.

According, at this juncture and upon due consideration of the records in both of these matters, it is

ORDERED that respondent's Motion To Close on Ground of Duplication in Docket No. 4673-22S is denied. It is further

ORDERED that, on the Court's own motion, the case at Docket No. 4673-22S is dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction. It is further

ORDERED that the Motion To Proceed Remotely, filed February 14, 2022, by petitioners at Docket No. 4673-22S is denied as moot.


Summaries of

Wielicki v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

United States Tax Court
Aug 3, 2022
No. 4673-22S (U.S.T.C. Aug. 3, 2022)
Case details for

Wielicki v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue

Case Details

Full title:PETER J. WIELICKI & ANNE K. WIELICKI, Petitioners v. COMMISSIONER OF…

Court:United States Tax Court

Date published: Aug 3, 2022

Citations

No. 4673-22S (U.S.T.C. Aug. 3, 2022)