- 36 -
respondent filed a motion to dismiss INI as a petitioner for lack
of jurisdiction. Respondent contends that because INI is a
dissolved corporation, it lacks the capacity to file a petition
with this Court.
As we have observed, it might
At first blush * * * seem anomalous that
respondent would issue a statutory notice of deficiency
to a taxpayer and then turn around and say that there
is no taxpayer who can petition this Court for a
redetermination of the determined deficiency * * *.
Yet, section 6212(b)(1) is explicit in its language
which permits respondent * * * to send a notice of
deficiency to a corporation which has terminated its
existence * * * [Great Falls Bonding Agency, Inc. v.
Commissioner, 63 T.C. 304, 306 (1974).]
Concerning INI’s ability to invoke the Court’s jurisdiction
by filing a petition, our Rules provide that “A case shall be
brought by and in the name of the person against whom the
Commissioner determined the deficiency”. Rule 60(a). This Court
has held that if the person against whom the deficiency was
determined lacks the capacity to file a petition with this Court,
the petition must be dismissed for want of jurisdiction.
Brannon’s of Shawnee, Inc. v. Commissioner, 71 T.C. 108, 111
(1978).
Under Rule 60(c), “The capacity of a corporation to engage
in * * * [litigation before this Court] shall be determined by
the law under which it was organized.” We look to the laws of
the State of incorporation to determine whether a dissolved
corporation has the capacity to sue. See Brannon’s of Shawnee,
Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011