- 15 -
interpreted these provisions [6330(d)(1)] to mean that district
courts have jurisdiction under section 6330 only if the Tax Court
lacks jurisdiction.” Lewis v. IRS, 86 AFTR2d 2000-6839, 2000-2
USTC par. 50,837 (S.D. Tex. 2000) (emphasis added). The United
States District Court for the Northern District of Texas held:
“a district court has jurisdiction to hear this type of suit [a
claim under 6330] only if the Tax Court lacks jurisdiction. * * *
District Courts have jurisdiction under section 6330 only if the
Tax Court lacks jurisdiction.” McCune v. United States, 85
AFTR2d 2000-1240, 2000-1 USTC par. 50,279 (N.D. Tex. 2000)
(emphasis added). The United States District Court for the
Eastern District of Pennsylvania held that section 6330(d)(1)
“provides for review to the Tax Court, unless the Tax Court does
not have jurisdiction, in which case the appeal goes to a
district court”. Hart v. IRS, 87 AFTR2d 2001-1531, 2001-1 USTC
par. 50,328 (E.D. Pa. 2001) (emphasis added).
II. “Opening the Backdoor”
Historically, the Tax Court has been a court of limited
jurisdiction, and we may exercise our jurisdiction only to the
extent authorized by Congress. See sec. 7442; Naftel v.
Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). The grant of jurisdiction
to review deficiencies determined by the Commissioner does not
provide us with jurisdiction to review taxes imposed under
subtitle C, subtitle D (with the exception of excise taxes
Page: Previous 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011