Gruen Watch Co. v. Evatt

• Decision Date: 21 June 1944
• Docket Number: 29860.
• Citation: 55 N.E.2d 794,143 Ohio St. 461
• Parties: GRUEN WATCH CO. v. EVATT, Tax Com'r, et al.
• Court: Ohio Supreme Court

55 N.E.2d 794

143 Ohio St. 461

GRUEN WATCH CO. v. EVATT, Tax Com'r, et al.

No. 29860.

Supreme Court of Ohio

June 21, 1944

Syllabus by the Court.

1. Under the provisions of Section 5389, General Code, personal property used in business shall be listed for taxation at the book value thereof, if any, less book depreciation, at such time or times, and such depreciated book value shall be taken to be the true value of such property, unless the assessor shall find that such depreciated book value is greater or less than the then true value of such property in money.

2. When such property has been imported and the value thereof has been improved by the payment of import duties, such items should be considered in determining the then true value in money.

Appeal from Board of Tax Appeals.

The appellant, The Gruen Watch Company, is an Ohio corporation engaged in importing and manufacturing watches. For the purpose of personal property taxation it filed a return showing the sum of $826,911.95 as the average depreciated book value of its manufacturing inventory for the fiscal year ending March 31, 1939. Under favor of Section 5388, General Code, providing for the assessment of such property at fifty per centum of its true value, the appellant therefore listed a taxable value of $413,455.00.

However included in the total inventory was an item of $513,157.66 for imported watch movements and parts. From this figure the appellant asked a deduction of $200,297.97, representing import duties paid thereon. The request was based upon the appellant's contention that these duties should not be considered in determining the true value of the watch movements and parts.

The claim for the deduction was disallowed by the Tax Commissioner.

Upon an appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals the decision of the commissioner was affirmed.

The case is now in this court for review upon the contention of the appellant that the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals is unreasonable and unlawful.

Taft Stettinius & Hollister, J. Mack Swigert, and Richard V Runyan, all of Cincinnati, for appellant.

Thomas J. Herbert, Atty. Gen., and Perry L. Graham, of Columbus, for appellee.

WEYGANDT Chief Justice.

Section 5389, General Code, provides in part that in 'the case of personal property used in business, the book value thereof, if any, less book depreciation, at such time or times, shall be listed and such depreciated book value shall be taken to be the true value of such property, unless the assessor shall find that such depreciated book value is greater or less that the then true value of such property in money.'

The appellee contends that the Tax Commissioner made no finding that the true value of the watch movements and parts was greater or less than the depreciated book value for the reason that the record discloses no basis therefor. This is correct except for the appellant's statement therein that the depreciated book value includes the sum of $200,297.97 representing import duties paid thereon. Does this constitute evidence, requiring the allowance of the appellant's requested deduction? The answer of the Tax Commissioner was in the negative, and this view was affirmed by the Board of Tax Appeals.

The standard...