NT, Inc. d.b.a. Natures Touch - Page 5

                                         -5-                                          
          or defending any part of the case.  See United States v. 2.61               
          Acres of Land, 791 F.2d 666 (9th Cir. 1985); Reed v. Norman, 309            
          P.2d 809 (Cal. 1957) (and the cases cited therein); see also                
          Grell v. Laci Le Beau Corp., 73 Cal. App. 4th 1300, 1306 (1999).            
          Thus, given petitioner’s inability to prosecute or defend any               
          part of this case, including its lack of capacity to defend                 
          itself against the motion at hand, we shall dismiss this case and           
          enter a decision against petitioner as to all matters in dispute.           
          See Rules 60(c), 123(b); see also sec. 7459(d); cf. David Dung              
          Le, M.D., Inc. v. Commissioner, supra.2                                     
               Petitioner in its petition alleges that respondent bears the           
          burden of proof under section 7491 as to all matters inclusive of           
          the deficiencies, additions to tax, and accuracy-related                    

          2 In David Dung Le, M.D., Inc. v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 268                
          (2000), affd. 22 Fed. Appx. 837 (9th Cir. 2001), the Court held             
          that a California corporation lacked the power to file a lawsuit            
          in this Court while its corporate powers were suspended by the              
          State of California.  In reaching that holding, the Court quoted            
          Cal. Rev. & Tax. Code secs. 23301 and 23302 (West 2004) and noted           
          that the Supreme Court of California has construed those sections           
          to mean that a corporation may not prosecute or defend an action            
          during the period in which it is suspended.  See David Dung Le,             
          M.D., Inc. v. Commissioner, supra at 272.  While this Court                 
          dismissed the petition in David Dung Le, M.D., Inc. for lack of             
          jurisdiction, we do not do similarly here, where petitioner had             
          the requisite capacity to file the petition that commenced this             
          lawsuit.  Where a taxpayer such as petitioner files a timely                
          petition with this Court, our jurisdiction is invoked and remains           
          unimpaired until the controversy is decided notwithstanding                 
          events which may occur after the filing of the petition.  See               
          Main-Hammond Land Trust v. Commissioner, 17 T.C. 942, 956 (1951),           
          affd. 200 F.2d 308 (6th Cir. 1952); cf. Coninck v. Commissioner,            
          100 T.C. 495, 498 (1993); Dorl v. Commissioner, 57 T.C. 720, 722            
          (1972).                                                                     





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011