- 8 -
Respondent’s Oral Motion To Dismiss and To Strike
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction and we may
exercise our jurisdiction only to the extent authorized by
Congress. Sec. 7442; Judge v. Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1175, 1180-
1181 (1987); Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985).
Respondent moves to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and to
strike the allegations in the second amended petition pertaining
to the lien filed October 8, 1998, and the assessment and
collection of the frivolous return penalty imposed under section
6702. There is no dispute that the lien in question was filed
on October 8, 1998–-a date that precedes the effective date of
section 6330. It follows that the Court lacks jurisdiction to
review the lien action in this proceeding. Consequently, we
shall grant respondent’s oral motion to dismiss and to strike.
Respondent’s Motion for Summary Judgment
Petitioners contend that the Appeals officer failed to
obtain verification from the Secretary that the requirements of
all applicable laws and administrative procedures were met as
required under section 6330(c)(1). Respondent maintains that
there is no dispute as to a material fact on this point and that
respondent is entitled to judgment as a matter of law sustaining
the notice of determination dated October 5, 2001. We agree
with respondent.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011