If you petition a SNOD and your petition hits Judge Paris’ desk, she’ll give you an opinion, whether you want it or not.

Back from a vacation and a visit to Citifield, home of the Amazin’s, which is why this blogpost is being written in the midnight hour, I need to satisfy my readers, few but worthy.

So here’s William Alan Gay, Docket No. 10096-14, filed 9/2/15.

Wm Alan moved to dismiss his petition because IRS allegedly failed to participate in discovery, and anyway Wm Alan got a discharge in bankruptcy.

Nobody told Judge Paris about the bankruptcy, and it seems she is a trifle miffed at this omission. Post-petition and pre-discharge, IRS hit Wm Alan with a First Demand for Admissions. This Judge Paris tosses summarily.

But the automatic stay in 11 USC §362(a)(8) expires with the granting of a discharge. So if the debt is discharged, why go on with the case?

Well, Judge Paris will tell you why, even though Wm Alan wants out.

“… the Court does not regard ‘the dischargeability of the tax obligation’ to be an issue before us at this time, as the instant action is not a collection action under I .R .C. section 6330(d) but rather one for redetermination under I.R.C. section 6213(a). …prior to this bankruptcy filing, petitioner filed a timely petition in response to a Notice of Deficiency, dated April 14, 2014, for his taxable years 2007, 2008, 2009, and 2010, which invoked the jurisdiction of this Court. Accordingly, the tax and penalties in issue had not been assessed, but are assessable subject to the outcome of this case. Therefore, the Court’s jurisdiction to determine whether petitioner’s tax liabilities were discharged in the bankruptcy proceeding need not be answered as a prerequisite to deciding the substantive merits of the income tax issues presented in this case.” Order, at pp. 1-2.

And of course our old chum Settles says you can’t dismiss a timely petition from a SNOD without giving IRS a win. See my blogpost “Dismissed!”, 5/8/12.

But Judge Paris tells Wm Alan he can’t dismiss his petition. Why Judge Paris comes to this conclusion eludes me. Suppose Wm Alan concedes IRS was right and the SNOD is 100% valid. But if the indebtedness arising therefrom was discharged in bankruptcy, why should Wm Alan or anyone else care? So why waste time with a motion for entry of decision, when a simple dismissal does the same thing?

Ah, the anfractuosities of Tax Court practice. Let’s decide if the SNOD is correct, even if the indebtedness arising therefrom was discharged in bankruptcy.