Tyler v. Comm'r of Internal Revenue
| Docket Number | 7888-23S |
| Decision Date | 05 October 2023 |
| Parties | MYKEL TYLER, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent |
| Court | U.S. Tax Court |
ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
This case for the redetermination of a deficiency is before the Court on respondent's Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, filed June 30, 2023. Petitioner filed an objection to this Motion on September 5, 2023, and a supplement to the objection on September 28, 2023. For the reasons that follow, we must grant respondent's Motion and dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.
On September 22, 2022, respondent sent a Notice of Deficiency to petitioner's last known address. The Notice, which was dated September 26, 2022, was sent by certified mail and determined a deficiency in petitioner's federal income tax for the taxable year 2021.
On May 18, 2023, the Court received petitioner's electronically filed Petition to commence this case. The Petition seeks review of the Notice of Deficiency issued to petitioner for 2021.
In a case seeking redetermination of a deficiency, as here, our jurisdiction depends upon the issuance of a valid notice of deficiency and the timely filing of a petition. See §§ 6212 and 6213;[1] Rule 13(a) and (c); Hoffenberg v. Commissioner, 905 F.2d 665 (2d Cir. 1990) (per curiam), aff'g T.C. Memo. 1989-676; Hallmark Rsch. Collective v. Commissioner, 159 T.C 126 (2022). Generally, a notice of deficiency will be deemed valid for this purpose if it is sent to the taxpayer's last known address by certified or registered mail. See § 6212(a) and (b); Yusko v Commissioner, 89 T.C. 806, 807 (1987). In order to be timely, a petition must be filed within 90 days (or 150
2
days if the notice is addressed to a person outside the United States) of the date on which the Commissioner mails a valid notice of deficiency. See § 6213(a); Estate of Cerrito v. Commissioner, 73 T.C. 896, 898 (1980). We have no authority to extend this 90-day period. See Hallmark Rsch. Collective, 159 T.C. at 166-67. However, under certain circumstances, a timely mailed petition may be treated as though it were timely filed. See § 7502; Treas. Reg. § 301.7502-1.
On September 22, 2022, the Notice of Deficiency for 2021 was mailed to petitioner's last known address, which is within the United States. The Notice was dated September 26 2022. When the date appearing on a notice of deficiency is later than the date of its mailing, we have held that the date appearing on the notice controls. See Loyd v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1984-172; Jones v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1984-171. The last date to file a petition with this Court as to the Notice was therefore December 27, 2022.[2] See § 6213(a).
As noted above, the Petition in this case was electronically filed on May 18, 2023. The Petition was not filed within the period prescribed by the Internal Revenue Code, and this case must be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
We are sympathetic to petitioner's circumstances. But we have no authority to extend the time for filing a petition with this Court for redetermination of a deficiency "whatever the equities of a particular case may be and regardless of the cause for its not being filed within the required period." Axe v. Commissioner, 58 T.C. 256, 259 (1972). Nevertheless, while petitioner cannot pursue his case in this Court, he may continue to pursue administrative resolution of the 2021 tax liability with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS). Another remedy potentially available to petitioner, if feasible, is to pay the determined amount and thereafter file a claim for refund with the IRS. If that claim is denied (or not acted upon after six months), petitioner may file a suit for refund in the appropriate U.S. District Court or the U.S. Court of Federal Claims. See McCormick v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 138, 142 n.5 (1970).
In consideration...
To continue reading
Request your trial