T.C. Memo. 2006-199
UNITED STATES TAX COURT
KATHLEEN SULLIVAN ALIOTO, Petitioner v.
COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent
Docket No. 14356-03. Filed September 18, 2006.
Karen L. Hawkins, for petitioner.
Michael E. Melone, Andrew R. Moore, and Davis G. Yee, for
respondent.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
VASQUEZ, Judge: Respondent determined that petitioner did
not qualify for relief from joint and several liability for 1995
and 1996. The issue for decision is whether we have jurisdiction
- 2 -
to decide whether petitioner is entitled to relief pursuant to
section 6015(f).1
Background
Some of the facts have been stipulated. The stipulation of
facts and the attached exhibits are incorporated herein by this
reference. At the time she filed the petition, petitioner
resided in San Francisco, California.
On or about January 20, 1999, petitioner filed a request for
relief from joint and several liability for income taxes pursuant
to section 6015(f) for 1995 and 1996. Petitioner admitted that
relief is not available under section 6015(b) or (c) for 1995 and
1996. No deficiency was asserted against petitioner for 1995 or
1996.
Discussion
The Tax Court is a court of limited jurisdiction.
Commissioner v. Ewing, 439 F.3d 1009, 1012 (9th Cir. 2006), revg.
118 T.C. 494 (2002). Whether this Court has jurisdiction is
fundamental and may be raised by a party or on the Court’s own
motion. Ewing v. Commissioner, 118 T.C. at 495; Fernandez v.
Commissioner, 114 T.C. 324, 328 (2000).
1
Unless otherwise indicated, all section references are to
the Internal Revenue Code. In her petition, petitioner sought
relief pursuant to sec. 6015 for 1993, 1994, 1995, and 1996. The
parties agree that 1993 and 1994 are not at issue in this case.
- 3 -
Recently, the Court held that we lack jurisdiction over
“stand-alone” section 6015(f) cases (i.e., cases in which no
deficiency has been asserted) such as the case at bar. Billings
v. Commissioner, 127 T.C. ___ (2006). Additionally, the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, the court to which appeal
of this case apparently lies, also has held that the Tax Court
lacks jurisdiction over “stand alone” section 6015(f) cases
(i.e., cases in which no deficiency has been asserted) such as
the case at bar. Commissioner v. Ewing, 439 F.3d at 1014-1015.
Accordingly, pursuant to Billings and the opinion of the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s in Ewing, we
conclude that we lack jurisdiction over this case. Billings v.
Commissioner, supra; Toppi v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-182
(dismissing stand-alone section 6015(f) case for lack of
jurisdiction pursuant to Billings because the Commissioner did
not assert a deficiency for any of the years in issue); Stroud v.
Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 2006-175 (same); see also Commissioner
v. Ewing, 439 F.3d at 1014-1015; Golsen v. Commissioner, 54 T.C.
742 (1970), affd. 445 F.2d 985 (10th Cir. 1971). Therefore, we
shall dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction.
To reflect the foregoing,
An appropriate order of
dismissal for lack of
jurisdiction will be entered.