Brown v. New York State Tax Comm.

Decision Date05 July 1950
CourtNew York Supreme Court
PartiesOscar J. Brown, Plaintiff,<BR>v.<BR>New York State Tax Commission, Defendant.

Nathaniel L. Goldstein, Attorney-General (John C. Crary, Jr., of counsel), for defendant.

Brown, Mangin, O'Connor & Greene for plaintiff.

KINGSLEY, J.

This action is brought by plaintiff for both declaratory and injunctive relief against the defendant with respect to an assessment of additional personal income tax against the plaintiff for the year 1946. The defendant has moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that such an action is not maintainable for the reasons that no cause of action for equitable relief by way of an injunction is made out where there is an adequate, complete and exclusive remedy at law, and that declaratory judgment may not be resorted to for review of tax assessments in the face of the exclusive statutory procedure provided by section 375 of the Tax Law.

The complaint alleges in substance: that plaintiff filed an income tax return with defendant for the year 1946 on or before April 15, 1947, showing a taxable income of $14,346.77 on which he paid a tax of $182.29; that, with certain exceptions, a limitation has been placed upon the right of defendant by section 373 of the Tax Law to determine the tax due the State of New York from any taxpayer after the expiration of three years from the time the income tax return was made; that prior to April 15, 1950, the defendant requested plaintiff to consent that said time limitation for the determination of the tax due for the year 1946 be extended until the year 1952, which plaintiff refused to do; that thereafter plaintiff received from the defendant a "notice of additional assessment" purporting to have been made pursuant to the authority granted by section 373 of the Tax Law, which added $5,553.23 to the net income of the plaintiff as shown by the return previously filed by him, making a total of $19,900; that said additional assessment was not based on any facts, figures or information of any kind in possession of the defendant and was not made as the result of any audit or examination whatever and that by reason thereof the assessment was wholly illegal, fictitious and capricious; that there was no basis whatever for the opinion reached by defendant in arriving at the amount of the additional assessment; that the sole purpose of the same was to procure for defendant an extension of time in which to make a new determination of the taxes claimed to be due in the year 1946 as well as to examine plaintiff's books and accounts; that defendant by such illegal, arbitrary and capricious assessment seeks to compel plaintiff, after such period of limitation has expired, to present to it his records and books to show such arbitrary assessment is not correct and to place upon plaintiff the burden of proving the illegality thereof; that the right so asserted by defendant can only exist by a strained and forced construction of said section 373 of the Tax Law which has never been judicially interpreted to include the rights so claimed by the defendant; that the additional tax assessed against plaintiff carries a penalty as well as interest until paid; that defendant claims such arbitrary and capricious acts constitute a valid and lawful assessment of tax which can only be revised and reviewed in accordance with the provisions of sections 374 and 375 of the Tax Law; that plaintiff has no adequate remedy at law.

Section 373 of the Tax Law provides in part as follows:

§ 373. Powers of tax commission.
1. If in the opinion of the tax commission, any return of a taxpayer is in any essential respect incorrect, it shall have power to revise such return, or if any taxpayer fails to make return as herein required, the tax commission is authorized to make an estimate of the taxable income of such taxpayer from any information in its possession, and to assess the taxes, penalties and interest due the state from such taxpayer according to such revised return or the estimate so made. * * * Except as hereinafter provided in this subdivision, the amount of tax due under any return shall be determined by the tax commission within three years after the return was made". (Emphasis supplied.)

The procedure for administrative review upon hearing of additional assessments is contained in section 374 of the same law. It states:

§ 374. Revision and readjustment of accounts by tax commission.
"If an application for revision or refund, in a form prescribed by the tax commission, be filed with it by a taxpayer within two years from the time of the filing of the return, or if the tax of such taxpayer shall have been recomputed, or if an assessment of tax shall have been made where no return was filed, then within one year from the time of such recomputation or assessment, the tax commission may grant or deny such application in whole or in part and may allow a credit or refund in the manner prescribed by subdivision four of section three hundred seventy-seven of this chapter, and shall notify the taxpayer by mail accordingly. If a demand for hearing, in a form prescribed by the tax commission, is filed with it by a taxpayer within ninety days after the date of such mailing, the tax commission shall grant a hearing thereon and if it shall be made to appear, upon any such hearing by evidence submitted to it, that any such computation or assessment includes taxes or other charges which could not have been lawfully demanded, or that payment has been illegally made or exacted of any such amount so computed or assessed, the tax commission shall revise and resettle the same according to law and the facts, and adjust the computation or assessment of taxes accordingly, and shall mail notice of its determination thereon to the taxpayer."

Section 375 defines the procedure to review a determination of the Tax Commission as follows:

§ 375. Review of determination of tax commission.
"The determination of the tax commission after a demand for a hearing by any taxpayer, as prescribed by section three hundred seventy-four of this chapter, may be reviewed in the manner prescribed by and subject to the provisions of section one hundred ninety-nine of this chapter.
"Application to review any determination by the tax commission under this article shall be made within ninety days after the mailing of the notice of such determination. Eight days' notice shall be given to the tax commission of such application.
"Before making any such application the full amount of the taxes, interest and other charges stated in such determination must be deposited with the tax commission and an undertaking filed with the commission, in such amount and with such sureties as a justice of the supreme court shall approve, to the effect that if the proceeding is dismissed or the determination of the tax commission confirmed, the applicant will pay all costs and charges which may accrue against him in the prosecution of the proceeding, including costs of all appeals, or at the option of the applicant such undertaking may be in a sum sufficient to cover the taxes, interest and other charges, stated in such determination plus the costs and
...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Paliotto v. Town of Islip
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court
    • January 8, 1962
    ...York, 247 App.Div. 163, 287 N.Y.S. 288; Richfield Oil Corp. v. City of Syracuse, 287 N.Y. 234, 39 N.E.2d 219; Brown v. New York State Tax Commission, 199 Misc. 349, 99 N.Y.S.2d 73, affd. 279 App.Div. 837, 109 N.Y.S.2d 626, affd. 304 N.Y. 651, 107 N.E.2d 510; James v. Alderton Dock Yards, 25......
  • State ex rel. Anderson v. State Bd. of Equalization
    • United States
    • Montana Supreme Court
    • December 31, 1957
    ...of their statute constitute a statute of limitations. Marx v. Goodrich, 286 App.Div. 913, 142 N.Y.S.2d 28, 30; Brown v. New York State Tax Com'n, 199 Misc. 349, 99 N.Y.S.2d 73, 78. The Vermont court in Union Twist Drill Co. v. Harvey, 113 Vt. 493, 37 A.2d 389, 396, stated their statute, whi......
  • Top Tile Bldg. Supply Corp. v. New York State Tax Com'n
    • United States
    • New York Supreme Court — Appellate Division
    • November 15, 1984
    ...infirmities. Relying upon Slater v. Gallman, 38 N.Y.2d 1, 377 N.Y.S.2d 448, 339 N.E.2d 863 and Brown v. New York State Tax Comm., 199 Misc. 349, 353-354, 99 N.Y.S.2d 73, affd. 279 App.Div. 837, 109 N.Y.S.2d 626, affd. 304 N.Y. 651, 107 N.E.2d 510, petitioners contend that sections 1138 and ......
  • Slater v. Gallman
    • United States
    • New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
    • November 20, 1975
    ...is wholly fictitious and is made without any factual basis solely to extend a period of limitations (Brown v. New York State Tax Comm., 199 Misc. 349, 353--354, 99 N.Y.S.2d 73, 77--78, affd. 279 App.Div. 837, 109 N.Y.S.2d 626, affd. 304 N.Y. 651, 107 N.E.2d 510). Since this is not such a ca......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT