Opinion
April 15, 1965.
June 17, 1965.
Taxation — Mercantile license taxes — Manufacturing — Publisher who does not print magazine — Act of June 20, 1947, P.L. 745.
1. Directory Publishing Company, Inc. v. Pittsburgh, 205 Pa. Super. 423, Held controlling.
2. In this case, it was Held that the publisher of a magazine which did not print or bind the magazine was not engaged in manufacturing within the meaning of the Act of June 20, 1947, P.L. 745.
Before ERVIN, P.J., WRIGHT, WATKINS, MONTGOMERY, JACOBS, and HOFFMAN, JJ. (FLOOD, J., absent).
Appeal, No. 92, April T., 1965, from judgment of County Court of Allegheny County, No. A2164 of 1963, in case of Directory Publishing Co., Inc. v. School District of City of Pittsburgh et al. Judgment affirmed.
Appeal by taxpayer from tax assessment. Before LENCHER, P.J.
Adjudication filed finding for defendant; exception to adjudication dismissed and order entered directing judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appealed.
John G. Kish, with him Brennan Brennan, for appellant.
Justin M. Johnson, Assistant School Solicitor, with him Niles Anderson, School Solicitor, Regis C. Nairn, Assistant City Solicitor, and David W. Craig, City Solicitor, for appellee.
Argued April 15, 1965.
This appeal is a companion to that in Directory Publishing Company v. City of Pittsburgh, 205 Pa. Super. 423, 211 A.2d 509. The taxes in question were assessed by the School District of the City of Pittsburgh under authority of the Act of June 20, 1947, P.L. 745, 24 P.S. 582.1 et seq., which requires wholesale or retail vendors of, or dealers in, goods, wares and merchandise to procure a mercantile license and to pay an annual mercantile license tax. The definition section of the statute provides in pertinent part as follows: "(4) `Dealer in, or vendor of, goods, wares and merchandise' shall not include any mechanic who keeps a store or warehouse at his place of manufactory or workshop in which he sells only his own manufactures, any person vending or disposing of articles of his own growth, produce or manufacture, or any hawker or peddler licensed under any law of this Commonwealth".
The instant appeal is controlled by our opinion filed this day in the companion case. Although the language in the tax anything act differs somewhat from that in the statute here under consideration, the same question is involved. Cf. Koolvent Aluminum Awning Co. v. Pittsburgh, 186 Pa. Super. 233, 142 A.2d 428.
Judgment affirmed.