TAX COURT OPINION

Case: Diana Stroud, Petitioner, and Thomas M. Stroud, Intervenor
Docket Number: 1116-05
Judge: Foley
Opinion Type: memo
Filed: 08/22/2006
Pages: 4

T .C . Memo . 2006-17 5 UNITED STATES TAX COUR T DIANA STROUD , Petitioner , AND THOMAS M . STROUD , Intervenor v . COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE , Responden t Docket No . 1116-05 . Filed August 22, 2006 . Cruz Saavedra , for petitioner . Thomas M . Stroud , pro se . Michael R . Skutley , for respondent . MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION FOLEY , Judge : The issues for decision are whether this Court has jurisdiction pursuant to section 6015 ( e),I to decide whether Diana Stroud ( petitioner ) is entitled to relief fro m 1 Unless otherwise indicated , all section references are to the Internal Revenue Code in effect for the years in issue . SERVED AUG 2 2 2006 2 - joint Federal income tax liabilities relating to 1994 and 1996, and if so, whether respondent abused his discretion in denying petitioner a refund relating to 1994 and 1996 . FINDINGS OF FAC T On November 8, 1978, Thomas and Diana Stroud were married . On May 19, 1980, Mr . and Mrs . Stroud created the Stroud Family Trust (trust) in which they were the cotrustors, cotrustees, and cobeneficiaries . On June 29, 1981, Mr . and Mrs . Stroud conveyed their residence, located at 3856 Montego Drive, Huntington Beach, California (residence), to the trust . On or about October 19, 1995, Mr . and Mrs . Stroud filed a joint Federal income tax return relating to 1994 in which they reported, but failed to pay, a $36,543 tax liability . On November 20, 1995, respondent assessed the $36,543 liability but did not issue a notice of deficiency . On June 21, 1996, respondent filed a notice of Federal tax lien, relating to the 1994 liability, against the residence . On April 15, 1997, Mr . and Mrs . Stroud filed a joint Federal income tax return relating to 1996 in which they reported, but again failed to pay, a $48,939 tax liability . On June 9, 1997, respondent assessed the $48,939 liability, but did not issue a notice of deficiency . On December 4, 1997, respondent filed a notice of Federal tax lien, relating to the 1996 liability, against the residence . - 3 - On October 31, 1999, Mr . and Mrs . Stroud separated and commenced dissolution proceedings . On July 21, 2000, petitioner, pursuant to section 6015(f), filed a Form 8857, Request for Innocent Spouse Relief, for joint income tax liabilities relating to 1994 and 1996 through 1998 . In October of 2000, Mr . and Mrs . Stroud sold the residence and paid their 1994 and 1996 tax liabilities . On March 25, 2002, respondent granted petitioner's request for innocent spouse relief relating to 1994 and 1996 but denied her relief relating to 1997 and 1998 . Respondent, however, did not grant petitioner's request for refunds of $10,777 and $34,367 that constituted one-half of the payment applied to the 1994 and 1996 income tax liabilities, respectively . On April 4, 2002, petitioner appealed respondent's decision denying her a refund relating to 1994 and 1996 . On October 13, 2004, respondent's Appeals officer denied petitioner's appeal regarding her refund request but upheld respondent's determinations to grant petitioner equitable relief relating to 1994 and 1996 . On January 18, 2005, while residing in Fountain Valley, California, petitioner filed her petition seeking a redetermination of respondent's denial of a refund relating to 1994 and 1996 . OPINIO N We may exercise jurisdiction only to the extent authorized - 4 - by Congress . Estate of Branson v . Commissioner , 264 F .3d 904, 908 (9th Cir . 2001), affg . T .C . Memo . 1999-231 . Section 6015(e) provides that "In the case of an individual against whom a deficiency has been asserted and who elects to have subsection (b) or (c) apply * * * [he or she] may petition the Tax Court (and the Tax Court shall have jurisdiction) to determine the appropriate relief" . Sec . 6015(e)(1)(A) (emphasis added) . Because respondent did not assert a deficiency relating to either 1994 or 1996, this Court does not have jurisdiction to review respondent's determinations . Sec . 6015(e)(1) ; Billings v . Commissioner , 127 T .C . (2006) . Contentions we have not addressed are irrelevant, moot, or meritless . To reflect the foregoing, An appropriate order of dismissal for lack of jurisdiction will be entered .