Bullock v. Comm'r

2003 T.C. Memo. 5, 85 T.C.M. 737, 2003 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 4
CourtUnited States Tax Court
DecidedJanuary 7, 2003
DocketNo. 6713-02L
StatusUnpublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 2003 T.C. Memo. 5 (Bullock v. Comm'r) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bullock v. Comm'r, 2003 T.C. Memo. 5, 85 T.C.M. 737, 2003 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 4 (tax 2003).

Opinion

JANICE BULLOCK, Petitioner v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Bullock v. Comm'r
No. 6713-02L
United States Tax Court
T.C. Memo 2003-5; 2003 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 4; 85 T.C.M. (CCH) 737; T.C.M. (RIA) 55006;
January 7, 2003, Filed

*4 Respondent's motion to dismiss and to strike granted.

Janice Bullock, pro se.
Jerome D. Sekula and Jeffrey C. Venzie, for respondent.
Armen, Robert N., Jr.

ARMEN

MEMORANDUM OPINION

ARMEN, Special Trial Judge: This matter is before the Court on respondent's Motion To Dismiss For Lack Of Jurisdiction And To Strike, as supplemented. Respondent moves to dismiss and strike as to the taxable years 1991 and 1992 on the ground that petitioner was not issued a notice of determination concerning collection action(s) for those years. As explained below, we shall grant respondent's motion, as supplemented.

Background

On January 20, 1996, respondent served the City of Philadelphia with a Notice of Levy on Wages, Salary, and Other Income in an effort to collect taxes due from Janice Bullock (petitioner) for 1991 and 1992. On May 15, 1996, respondent served Corestates Bank with a Notice of Levy in a further effort to collect taxes due from petitioner for 1991 and 1992. On April 3, 1997, respondent issued to petitioner a Final Notice -- Notice of Intent to Levy regarding her unpaid taxes for 1991 and 1992. On*5 April 24, 2000, respondent issued to petitioner a notice that respondent had applied $ 1,027.79 of taxes that she overpaid on her Federal income tax return for 1999 to taxes remaining due for the taxable years 1992 and 1993.

On November 29, 2000, respondent issued to petitioner a Final Notice -- Notice of Intent to Levy and Notice of Your Right to a Hearing with regard to her unpaid taxes for the taxable years 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996. On December 26, 2000, petitioner filed with respondent a Form 12153, Request for a Collection Due Process Hearing. Petitioner subsequently attended an administrative hearing at respondent's Appeals Office in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

On February 19, 2002, respondent sent to petitioner by certified mail a Notice Of Determination Concerning Collection Action(s) Under Section 6320 and/ or 6330. 1 On March 28, 2002, the Court received and filed a Petition for Lien or Levy Action Under Code Sections 6320(c) or 6330(d). 2 The petition lists the years in dispute as 1991 through 1996.

*6 As indicated, respondent moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and to strike as to the taxable years 1991 and 1992. Respondent contends that the Court lacks jurisdiction with regard to 1991 and 1992 on the ground that respondent has not issued to petitioner a notice of determination with regard to those years. Respondent avers that the notice of determination dated February 19, 2002, on which the petition is based, pertains only to the taxable years 1993 through 1996. Petitioner filed an objection to respondent's motion, attaching to her objection copies of the notices of levy for 1991 and 1992 that respondent served on the City of Philadelphia and Corestates Bank (described above).

This matter was called for hearing at the Court's motions session held in Washington, D.C. Counsel for respondent appeared at the hearing and offered argument in support of the motion to dismiss. There was no appearance by or on behalf of petitioner. Following the hearing, respondent filed a supplement to his motion. Petitioner failed to file a response to respondent's supplement as directed by the Court.

Discussion

The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, and we may exercise our jurisdiction*7 only to the extent authorized by Congress. Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985). The Court's jurisdiction to review collection actions under sections 6320 (liens) and 6330 (levies) depends on the issuance of a notice of determination and the filing of a timely petition for review. See Sarrell v. Comm'r, 117 T.C. 122, 125 (2001); Offiler v. Commissioner, 114 T.C. 492, 498 (2000).

Section 6330

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Paulette Etoty v. Commissioner
2020 T.C. Memo. 49 (U.S. Tax Court, 2020)
Perry v. Comm'r
2010 T.C. Memo. 219 (U.S. Tax Court, 2010)
Davis v. Comm'r
2008 T.C. Memo. 238 (U.S. Tax Court, 2008)
Boyd v. Commissioner of IRS
451 F.3d 8 (First Circuit, 2006)
Barrett v. Comm'r
2006 T.C. Summary Opinion 42 (U.S. Tax Court, 2006)
Bullock v. Comm'r
2006 T.C. Memo. 6 (U.S. Tax Court, 2006)
Greene-Thapedi v. Comm'r
126 T.C. No. 1 (U.S. Tax Court, 2006)
Llwellyn Greene-Thapedi v. Commissioner
126 T.C. No. 1 (U.S. Tax Court, 2006)
Boyd v. Comm'r
124 T.C. No. 18 (U.S. Tax Court, 2005)
Kenneth B. and Marie L. Boyd v. Commissioner
124 T.C. No. 18 (U.S. Tax Court, 2005)
WARREN v. COMMISSIONER
2003 T.C. Summary Opinion 76 (U.S. Tax Court, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2003 T.C. Memo. 5, 85 T.C.M. 737, 2003 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 4, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bullock-v-commr-tax-2003.