- 6 -
6330(d)(1). Respondent filed a Motion to Dismiss for Lack of
Jurisdiction on August 7, 2006.
An evidentiary hearing took place in Chicago, Illinois.
OPINION
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, and we may
exercise that jurisdiction only to the extent authorized by
Congress. Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). The
Court’s jurisdiction under sections 6320 and 6330 depends upon
the issuance of a valid notice of determination and the filing of
a timely petition for review. See Orum v. Commissioner, 123 T.C.
1 (2004), affd. 412 F.3d 819 (7th Cir. 2005); Sarrell v.
Commissioner, 117 T.C. 122, 125 (2001); Moorhous v. Commissioner,
116 T.C. 263, 269 (2001); Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492,
498 (2000); see also Rule 330(b). Thus, in the absence of a
notice of determination, this Court lacks jurisdiction.
Respondent did not issue a notice of determination in respect of
petitioner’s outstanding tax liabilities for 2000 and 2001. A
decision letter resulting from an equivalent hearing concerning a
collections issue is insufficient to invoke the Court’s
jurisdiction under section 6320 or 6330. Moorhous v.
Commissioner, supra at 270-271; Kennedy v. Commissioner, 116 T.C.
255, 263 (2001); Cowan v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-255, on
appeal (9th Cir., Jan. 29, 2007); cf. Craig v. Commissioner, 119
T.C. 252 (2002). However, as relevant herein, a necessary
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011