From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Vroman v. Porterfield

Supreme Court of Ohio
Dec 31, 1969
254 N.E.2d 356 (Ohio 1969)

Opinion

No. 69-379

Decided December 31, 1969.

Taxation — Returns for personal property — Machinery and equipment — Book value — Annual depreciation.

APPEAL from the Board of Tax Appeals.

Messrs. Shawaker Smith and Mr. Charles J. Smith, for appellant.

Mr. Paul W. Brown, attorney general, and Mr. W. Robinson Watters, for appellee.


The appellant taxpayer is engaged in the manufacture of popsicles and other frozen novelties in Toledo, Ohio, and distributes its products over a five-state area. For the personal property tax years 1964, 1965 and 1966, appellant returned its machinery and equipment at book value with depreciation computed on individual lives, the weighted average of which was 8.3 years, or a little less than 12.5%.

Upon audit, the Tax Commissioner found that the book value of appellant's machinery for the tax years in question was less than its true value and recomputed the value by applying a 10% annual depreciation under the "302" computation. (See Wheeling Steel Corp. v. Evatt, 143 Ohio St. 71.) Evidently, the Tax Commissioner favorably considered the claim of the taxpayer that due to the nature of its particular business, the prima facie annual allowance of 7.5%, established by administrative directive for "Food Processing — dairy products," was not applicable to this particular taxpayer.

Not being satisfied with the assessment of the Tax Commissioner, appellant appealed to the Board of Tax Appeals in pursuit of its claim that the true value of its machinery was properly reflected by the book value thereof.

The Board of Tax Appeals affirmed the order of the Tax Commissioner but in its opinion indicated that, although appellant complied with its request to submit to it additional data, "the method of disposal or value at times of disposal" was not shown. That information is, in fact, contained in appellant's Exhibit "N."

Therefore, the decision appealed from is reversed and the cause is remanded to the Board of Tax Appeals for its reconsideration of the record and for further proceedings according to law.

Decision reversed.

TAFT, C.J., MATTHIAS, O'NEILL, SCHNEIDER, HERBERT, DUNCAN and CORRIGAN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Vroman v. Porterfield

Supreme Court of Ohio
Dec 31, 1969
254 N.E.2d 356 (Ohio 1969)
Case details for

Vroman v. Porterfield

Case Details

Full title:VROMAN ICE CREAM CO., APPELLANT, v. PORTERFIELD, TAX COMMR., APPELLEE

Court:Supreme Court of Ohio

Date published: Dec 31, 1969

Citations

254 N.E.2d 356 (Ohio 1969)
254 N.E.2d 356

Citing Cases

Vroman Ice Cream Co. v. Porterfield

The board affirmed, but in its opinion indicated that appellant failed to show the method of disposal of its…

Alcoa v. Kosydar

The disposal records revealed in the instant cause that the machinery and equipment had an estimated life of…