SAID v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE (2021)

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.2021-02-22No. No. 20-70223

Summary · law.co

Holding. The court affirmed the Tax Court's dismissal, concluding that the Tax Court correctly determined it lacked jurisdiction because the Saids failed to file their petition within the statutory deadlines required by federal tax law.

The Saids appealed a Tax Court dismissal of their petition challenging tax deficiencies for tax years 1993 through 1995. The Tax Court had dismissed the petition because the Saids filed it outside the required timeframes: they did not submit it within 90 days of receiving a notice of deficiency or within 30 days of receiving a notice of determination regarding liens or levies. The appellate court reviewed the Tax Court's jurisdictional ruling without deference and found the Tax Court properly lacked authority to hear the case.

Summary generated by law.co from the public-domain opinion. The opinion text itself is public domain.

Key issues

Tax Court jurisdiction over tardy petitions
Timeliness requirements for appealing notices of deficiency and notices of determination
Whether Tax Court rules could override jurisdictional time limits

Procedural posture

The Saids appealed pro se from a Tax Court order dismissing their petition for lack of jurisdiction, and the appellate court reviewed the jurisdictional question de novo.

Authorities cited

No cited authorities resolved to law.co cases yet.

Opinion · public domain

MEMORANDUM **

Alber I. Said and Georgette H. Said appeal pro se from the Tax Courts order dismissing for lack of jurisdiction their petition regarding their tax liabilities for the 1993 to 1995 tax years. We have jurisdiction under 26 U.S.C. § 7482(a)(1). We review de novo. Gorospe v. Commr, 451 F.3d 966, 968 (9th Cir. 2006). We affirm.

The Tax Court properly concluded that it lacked jurisdiction over the Saids’ petition because the Saids did not file it within 90 days of a notice of deficiency or 30 days of a notice of determination. See 26 U.S.C. §§ 6213(a) (establishing a 90-day requirement for appealing a notice of deficiency); 6320(c) & 6330(d)(1) (establishing a 30-day requirement for appealing a notice of determination concerning notices of lien or notices of intent to levy); Gorospe, 451 F.3d at 968 (the Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction, and its subject matter is defined by Title 26 of the United States Code).

We reject as meritless the Saids’ contentions that the Tax Courts final decisions sustaining the deficiency for 1993 to 1995 were reached by fraud or mutual mistake, and that Tax Court Rules 314 and 341 create jurisdiction for their petition.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

All pending motions and requests are denied.

AFFIRMED.