Urgent Care Nurses Registry, Inc. v. Comm'r
This text of 2016 T.C. Memo. 198 (Urgent Care Nurses Registry, Inc. 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.
Opinion
An order will be entered granting respondent's motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.
LAUBER,
The following facts are derived from respondent's motion, the exhibit attached thereto, and publicly available records of the State of California. Urgent Care Nurses Registry, Inc. had a corporate address in California at the time the petition was filed.
Petitioner was incorporated in California on July 21, 2005, and was assigned a taxpayer identification number by the California Franchise Tax Board (board). On August 1, 2008, the board suspended petitioner's corporate charter pursuant to
Petitioner filed some income and employment tax returns for 2009 through 2013 but enclosed no payments. It failed to file other returns, and the IRS pre-pared substitutes for returns (SFRs) that met the requirements of
Petitioner timely requested a collection due process (CDP) hearing, and a settlement officer (SO) was assigned to the case. In June 2015 the SO informed petitioner's representative: "The revenue officer's case history indicates that Urgent Care Nurses Registry, Inc. may no longer be in business. You/your representative told the revenue officer that the business is now*199 being operated under the EIN of [a] sole proprietorship." The SO requested copies of documents "confirming the dissolution of the corporate entity." Petitioner's representative submitted a copy of Form 966, Corporate Dissolution or Liquidation, and a certi-ficate of dissolution of petitioner.
A telephone CDP hearing was held on June 26, 2015, and the SO requested followup documentation by August 3, 2015. Having received none of the requested documentation by August 18, 2015, the SO closed the case and, on August 28, 2015, issued petitioner a notice of determination sustaining the proposed levy.
On September 28, 2015, petitioner timely sought review in this Court. On July 28, 2016, respondent filed a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, contending that the petition was not filed by a party with capacity to sue under
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2016 T.C. Memo. 198, 112 T.C.M. 480, 2016 Tax Ct. Memo LEXIS 197, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/urgent-care-nurses-registry-inc-v-commr-tax-2016.