- 6 -
return.8 Consequently, any addition to tax under section
6651(a)(1) that remains relates to the amount assessed by
respondent prior to the issuance of the notice of deficiency.9
OPINION
By way of a motion for entry of decision, respondent
contends that this Court does not have jurisdiction to review the
assessed addition to tax. The question of the Court’s
jurisdiction is fundamental and must be addressed when raised by
a party or on the Court’s own motion. See Naftel v.
Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 530 (1985); Estate of Young v.
Commissioner, 81 T.C. 879, 880-881 (1983).
This Court is a court of limited jurisdiction. See Judge v.
Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1175, 1180 (1987); Estate of Young v.
Commissioner, supra at 881; Medeiros v. Commissioner, 77 T.C.
1255, 1259 (1981). We may exercise jurisdiction only to the
extent expressly provided by Congress. See sec. 7442; Breman v.
Commissioner, 66 T.C. 61, 66 (1976). Section 6213 confers
jurisdiction on this Court to redetermine deficiencies in income,
estate, gift, and certain excise taxes. See also secs. 6211-
8 The statement of account dated Feb. 29, 2000, which the
parties have stipulated, provides for a revised estate tax
liability of $2,003,524. This figure is $162,041 less than the
estate tax liability of $2,165,565 shown on the estate tax
return.
9 The statement of account provides for a revised sec.
6651(a)(1) addition to tax of $342,343. This figure is $36,459
less than the addition to tax previously assessed by respondent
of $378,802.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011