- 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