DocketNumber: Docket No. 18198-14.
Citation Numbers: 2014 U.S. Tax Ct. LEXIS 58
Judges: \"Michael B. Thornton\"
Filed Date: 12/30/2014
Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/20/2020
On October 23, 2014, respondent filed in the above-captioned case a Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, on the ground that the petition was not filed within the time prescribed by
The petition was filed with the Court on August 4, 2014, which date is 406 days after the notice of deficiency for tax year 2012 was mailed to petitioner. The petition was hand delivered to the Court on the August 4, 2014, date.
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. It may therefore exercise jurisdiction only to the extent expressly provided by statute.
In the present case, the time for filing a petition with this Court expired on September 23, 2013. However, the petition was not filed within that period.
Petitioner was served with a copy of respondent's motion to dismiss and, on November 24, 2014, filed an objection. In that document, petitioner stated that he had never received any documentation indicating that moneys were owed. More broadly, he likewise suggested that he had received no correspondence or communications from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the nearly two years following the 2012 tax year, despite alleged attempts by petitioner to contact the IRS regarding the status of an expected refund.
Such statements, coupled with the fact that the notice of deficiency was sent to an address in Bowie, Maryland, rather than to petitioner's*60 current address of record in Fort Washington, Maryland, potentially raised the question of whether the notice of deficiency was properly mailed to petitioner's last known address. By Order dated December 2, 2014, the Court directed respondent to file a response to petitioner's objection. Respondent so filed a response on December 18, 2014, focusing on the issue of proper mailing. Therein, respondent explained, and provided attached transcript documentation supporting, that the address used on the notice of deficiency was identical with that used by petitioner on petitioner's 2012 tax return, the return most recently filed before the issuance of the notice on June 24, 2013. Additionally, respondent indicated that IRS records did not show that petitioner had provided notice of change of address to IRS between the date the 2012 return was filed and June 24, 2013. Rather, IRS transcripts reflected a change to the Fort Washington address only occurring during the cycle from February 21 to 27, 2014. In that regard, it is noteworthy that petitioner in the objection and other filings has at no time claimed to have notified the IRS about a new address prior to the notice's mailing.
A notice*61 of deficiency is sufficient if it is mailed to the taxpayer's last known address.
Here, the record is devoid of any evidence or claim to suggest that petitioner at any relevant time prior to the June mailing gave the IRS "clear and concise" notice of any other address. Thus, while the Court is sympathetic to petitioner's circumstances, the record lacks any indication of impropriety in the sending of the notice, and, hence, the law permits no remedy.
The Court has no authority to extend that period provided by law for filing a petition "whatever*62 the equities of a particular case may be and regardless of the cause for its not being filed within the required period."
The premises considered, it is
ORDERED that respondent's Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction is granted, and this case is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.
ENTERED: