                         T.C. Memo. 1998-319



                       UNITED STATES TAX COURT


                ROBERT K. STEWART, JR., Petitioner v.
             COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE, Respondent



     Docket No. 4901-97.                   Filed September 8, 1998.



     Robert K. Stewart, Jr., pro se.

     Kay Hill, for respondent.



               MEMORANDUM FINDINGS OF FACT AND OPINION


     LARO, Judge:    Petitioner petitioned the Court to redetermine

respondent's determination of a $17,287 deficiency in his 1990

Federal income tax and a $4,297 addition thereto under section

6651(a)(1).    Following concessions, the only issue left to decide

is whether we are authorized to determine any overpayment from

1989 that petitioner may credit to his 1990 Federal income tax

liability.    We hold we are not.   Section references are to the
                                - 2 -


Internal Revenue Code in effect for the year at issue.      Rule

references are to the Tax Court Rules of Practice and Procedure.

Dollar amounts are rounded to the nearest dollar.

                          FINDINGS OF FACT

     Some of the facts have been stipulated and are so found.

The stipulations of fact and the exhibits submitted therewith are

incorporated herein by this reference.    Petitioner resided in

Anchorage, Alaska, when he petitioned the Court.

     Petitioner filed his 1989 Federal income tax return on

March 5, 1996.    Petitioner claimed thereon that he had a $4,312

overpayment which he was applying to 1990.      Petitioner filed his

1990 Federal income tax return on June 13, 1996.

     Respondent issued petitioner a notice of deficiency for 1990

on December 3, 1996.   In the notice of deficiency, respondent did

not reference an overpayment for 1989.    Respondent asserts that a

refund or credit of any 1989 overpayment is time-barred.

                               OPINION

     Petitioner asks the Court to reduce his deficiency for 1990

by an overpayment that he has for 1989.      We decline to do so.

We are a Court of limited jurisdiction, and we derive our

jurisdiction from Congress.    Neilson v. Commissioner, 94 T.C. 1,

9 (1990); Naftel v. Commissioner, 85 T.C. 527, 529 (1985); see

also sec. 7442.   In general, the Congress has empowered us to

redetermine deficiencies which have been determined by
                                - 3 -


respondent.   See secs. 6213 and 6214; Murphree v. Commissioner,

87 T.C. 1309, 1311 (1986); see also sec. 6211 (meaning of the

word "deficiency").    When respondent has not determined a

deficiency for a year, we generally may not redetermine if a

deficiency or overpayment is present for that year.    See sec.

6214(b) ("The Tax Court in redetermining a deficiency * * * shall

have no jurisdiction to determine whether or not the tax for any

other year or calendar quarter has been overpaid or underpaid");

see also Rothensies v. Electric Storage Battery Co., 329 U.S. 296

(1946); Commissioner v. Gooch Milling & Elevator Co., 320 U.S.

418 (1943); Hays v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1996-18; Warden v.

Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-321, affd. without published

opinion sub nom. Beam v. Commissioner, 956 F.2d 1166 (9th Cir.

1992); Stowman v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1983-235; Hutchinson

v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1980-551.

     In the instant case, respondent has determined a deficiency

for 1990, and petitioner's 1990 taxable year is the only year

that is before the Court.    Thus, even if petitioner did overpay

his 1989 tax, a matter on which we express no opinion, we would

lack jurisdiction to apply that overpayment against petitioner's

deficiency for 1990.

     We have considered all arguments made by petitioner for a

contrary holding, and, to the extent not addressed above, find

them to be without merit.    To reflect respondent's concessions,
- 4 -


        Decision will be entered

  under Rule 155.
