Opinion
November 11, 1963.
December 12, 1963.
Before RHODES, P.J., ERVIN, WRIGHT, WOODSIDE, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, and FLOOD, JJ.
Appeal, No. 252, April T., 1963, from order of Court of Oyer and Terminer of Fayette County, Sept. T., 1962, No. 33-122, in case of Commonwealth v. Helen M. Cecchini. Order affirmed.
Indictment charging defendant with embezzlement.
Defendant's motion to quash indictment sustained, opinion by FEIGUS, J. Commonwealth appealed.
Albert D. Stuart, Assistant Attorney General, with him William J. Franks, Assistant District Attorney, John R. Hoye, District Attorney, and Walter E. Alessandroni, Attorney General, for Commonwealth, appellant.
William Moldovan, for appellee.
Commonwealth v. Shafer, 202 Pa. Super. 179, followed.
Argued November 11, 1963.
Helen M. Cecchini was indicted by the Fayette County Grand Jury on a charge of embezzlement by tax collector under Section 823 of The Penal Code. Act of June 24, 1939, P.L. 872, 18 P.S. 4823. The defendant was owner and operator of The Beverage Mart in the City of Uniontown, and failed to remit sales taxes allegedly collected from July 1, 1960, to August 1, 1961, in total amount of $2,280.10. The Commonwealth has appealed from an order of the court of oyer and terminer, entered June 26, 1963, quashing the indictment.
This case is controlled by our decision in the companion case of Commonwealth v. Shafer, 202 Pa. Super. 179, 195 A.2d 825. As aptly stated in the opinion below: "It is our conclusion that the legislature indicated no intention in its promulgation of the Sales and Use Tax Code to convert into `Tax Collectors' in the popular sense of that term a substantial segment of our citizenry engaged in mercantile pursuits upon whom has been imposed the statutory obligation of charging and collecting the sales tax at the source. Such an intention, in our view, would have been directly and unequivocally expressed. On the contrary, the civil and penal sections of the statute relative to collection of the tax are so complete and self-sustaining as to virtually preclude such an intent".
Order affirmed.