- 18 -
the instant case.
Under the circumstances, we need not and do not resolve the
parties’ dispute about an asserted oral notification of the
notice of deficiency. See McKay v. Commissioner, 89 T.C. 1063,
1069 n.7 (1987), and cases there cited, affd. 886 F.2d 1237 (9th
Cir. 1989).
Although petitioners cannot pursue their case in this Court,
they are not without a judicial remedy. Specifically,
petitioners may pay the tax, file a claim for refund with the
Internal Revenue Service, and if their claim is denied, then sue
for a refund in the appropriate Federal District Court or the
U.S. Court of Federal Claims. See Armstrong v. Commissioner, 15
F.3d 970, 973 n.2 (10th Cir. 1994), affg. T.C. Memo. 1992-328;
McCormick v. Commissioner, 55 T.C. 138, 142 n.5 (1970). We do
not express any view in the instant case as to whether our
opinion in Gam v. Commissioner, T.C. Summary Opinion 1999-61,
should have any preclusive or other effect in any such refund
suit.
We hold for respondent.
Respondent’s motion to dismiss will
be granted, and an appropriate order
will be entered dismissing the instant
case for lack of jurisdiction.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Last modified: May 25, 2011