Opinion
February 24, 1994
Appeal from the Supreme Court, New York County (Shirley Fingerhood, J.).
Where the taxpayer claims that a tax statute is wholly inapplicable, it may bring a declaratory judgment action without exhausting administrative remedies (see, Xerox Corp. v Department of Taxation Fin., 140 A.D.2d 945, 946, lv denied 72 N.Y.2d 809). Plaintiff in this action for a declaratory judgment has sufficiently demonstrated that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its challenges to Tax Law §§ 183, 184, 186-a and 186-c, all of which are to be narrowly construed in favor of the taxpayer (Debevoise Plimpton v. New York State Dept. of Taxation Fin., 80 N.Y.2d 657, 661), to satisfy the initial criterion to entitle it to a preliminary injunction of the administrative hearing on its tax liabilities. Moreover, without an injunction, plaintiff would be forced to defend the administrative proceeding to its conclusion even though a judgment in the within action has the potential to render the administrative proceeding unnecessary. Under the circumstances, the IAS Court's conclusion that plaintiff faced irreparable harm and was favored by a balancing of the equities was not an abuse of discretion (see, Gambar Enters. v. Kelly Servs., 69 A.D.2d 297, 306).
We have considered defendants' remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.
Concur — Carro, J.P., Ellerin, Rubin, Nardelli and Tom, JJ.