- 5 -
Discussion
1. Petitioner’s Oral Motion To Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction
We first consider petitioner’s oral motion to dismiss for
lack of jurisdiction due to an invalid notice of deficiency. If
we sustain petitioner’s motion, finding the notice to be invalid,
the Court will lack jurisdiction to hear this case and
respondent’s motion to strike will become moot. Accordingly, the
Court’s jurisdiction over this matter is resolved initially.
The United States Tax Court is a court of limited
jurisdiction. See sec. 7442. Under section 6213(a), the Court
has jurisdiction to redetermine deficiencies determined by the
Commissioner. The Court’s jurisdiction over deficiency
proceedings is contingent upon the issuance of a valid notice of
deficiency and a timely filed petition. See Rule 13(a), (c);
DaBoul v. Commissioner, 429 F.2d 38 (9th Cir. 1970); Monge v.
Commissioner, 93 T.C. 22, 27 (1989). “Thus, a valid notice of
deficiency and a timely petition are essential to our deficiency
jurisdiction, and we must dismiss any case in which one or the
other is not present.” Monge v. Commissioner, supra at 27.
A notice of deficiency is intended to serve two purposes.
Frieling v. Commissioner, 81 T.C. 42, 53 (1983). It is intended
to notify a taxpayer that a deficiency has been determined
against the taxpayer and provide the taxpayer with the
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011