- 7 -
We also note that it has not been alleged, much less proven,
that the notice of deficiency was "addressed to a person outside
of the United States". Accordingly, we have no basis upon which
to conclude that the petition was timely filed within the
alternate 150-day time period prescribed by section 6213(a).
Conclusion
Because petitioners did not file their petition with the
Court within the time period prescribed by section 6213(a), we
lack jurisdiction to redetermine petitioners' tax liability for
the taxable year in issue. Accordingly, we must grant
respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.4
In order to give effect to the foregoing,
An order granting respondent's
motion and dismissing this case for
lack of jurisdiction will be entered.
4 Although petitioners cannot pursue their case in this
Court, they are not without a judicial remedy. Specifically,
they may pay the tax, file a claim for refund with the Internal
Revenue Service, and, if their claim is denied, sue for a refund
in the appropriate Federal District Court or the United States
Court of Federal Claims. McCormick v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 138,
142 (1970).
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Last modified: May 25, 2011