Head v. Cigarette Sales Co.
Decision Date | 13 July 1939 |
Docket Number | 12830. |
Citation | 4 S.E.2d 203,188 Ga. 452 |
Parties | HEAD, Revenue Com'r, et al. v. CIGARETTE SALES CO. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court.
1. The assignments of error upon the failure of the court to sustain the defendants' pleas to the jurisdiction are without merit.
2. The tax imposed by the act of December 31, 1937 (Ga.L.Ex.Sess.1937-38, pp. 126-144), amending the act of March 30, 1937 (Ga.L.1937, pp. 83-109), upon every person who receives by any means in this State, and who holds or possesses for his or her own personal use in this State, or for the use of any member of his or her family, cigarettes which have not been stamped as required by the act, is an excise upon the privilege of holding or possessing such cigarettes for personal use, and is not a direct or ad valorem tax upon such articles. Accordingly, the statute does not violate the constitution of this State because the tax is not uniform with ad valorem tax levied by the State upon tangible property.
3. The State does not create an unreasonable classification in levying a tax upon persons who hold or possess for personal use unstamped cigarettes, while exempting those who hold or possess cigarettes for such purpose which have been stamped by a deal as required by law.
4. The tax is not levied upon an operation of interstate commerce but is a charge upon the holding or possessing for personal use after such commerce is at an end, and therefore the act imposing the tax does not violate the commerce clause of the Federal constitution, U.S. C.A.Const. art. 1, § 8, cl. 3.
5. Under the foregoing rulings, the instant petition, in which the plaintiff sought to enjoin the State Revenue Commissioner and another person from enforcing the statute so far as related to such tax, and to recover damages for previous acts alleged to have been committed by the defendants, did not state a cause of action for any of the relief sought. The court erred in overruling the general demurrers.
The petition in this case challenged the validity of part of the act of March 30, 1937 (Ga.L.1937, pp. 83-109), as amended by the act of December 31, 1937 (Ga.L.Ex.Sess.1937-1938, pp 126-144), and more especially the amending act, so far as related to cigarette tax. The suit was filed by Cigarette Sales Company, a partnership of Murphy, North Carolina against T. Grady Head, revenue commissioner of the State of Georgia, and two employees of the Revenue Department, J. G. Rockmore and Claude C. Miller. Miller was not served. The petition alleged that the plaintiff is engaged in the business of soliciting sales of cigarettes directly to purchasers in the State of Georgia, the sales being made by shipment from Murphy, North Carolina, so that the entire transaction in which petitioner is engaged is wholly within interstate commerce; that the defendants are undertaking to enforce the 'so-called tobacco-tax act,' as amended, in such manner as to injure the plaintiff's business, but that this statute, so far as applied to persons who purchase cigarettes from the plaintiff, is unconstitutional and void in that it violates stated provisions of the State and Federal constitutions. The petition further alleged that before March 1, 1938, the plaintiff had built up a valuable business, which was producing more than $100 per month as net profit, and was reasonably worth more than $25,000. Petitioner has already suffered damage in a large sum stated; and unless a court of equity restrains the illegal acts of the defendants, further and irreparable damages will be sustained, for which the plaintiff has no complete and adequate remedy at law. The petition contained prayers for injunction, damages, and general relief. The defendants Head and Rockmore separately filed general and special demurrers, and pleas to the jurisdiction. The court sustained some of the special grounds of demurrer and overruled others, and overruled all grounds of general demurrer. No ruling was made upon the pleas to the jurisdiction. Head and Rockmore sued out a writ of error, complaining of the overruling of their general demurrers, and of the failure of the court to act on the pleas to the jurisdiction.
Section 1 of the amendatory act provides as follows:
* * *
'(m-1) The amount of the tax levied upon the receipt, possession, use and consumption of tobacco products affected by the terms of said Act as amended shall be the same and computed on the same basis as would be the case if tobacco products of the same kind were sold or offered for sale * * * by a wholesale or retail dealer * * * and shall be paid through the use of stamps as provided in subdivision (n) of said Act * * *
Subsection (r) of section 1 excepted from the tax as many as four packages of not exceeding twenty cigarettes each when brought into this State for one's own personal use from a State which does not levy a tax upon the sale or use of cigars or cigarettes. Section 2(d) of the amendatory act contained the following: 'Every person receiving, holding, or possessing, within the State of Georgia, for his own personal use, or the personal use of members of his family, or who brings into the State of Georgia for his personal use in said State, or the use of the members of his family in said State, any cigars, cheroots, stogies, cigarettes, or any substitutes therefor taxable under this Act, and not stamped as required by this Act as herein amended, shall, within one hour after receipt of such products, or after having acquired possession thereof, or after having brought the same within the State of Georgia, as the case may be, and before the same, or any part thereof, are used or consumed, cause the same to have the requisite denomination and amount of stamp or stamps to represent the tax due thereon affixed as stated.' Other portions of the act, so far as material, together with the attacks made, are stated in the opinion, infra.
The plaintiff complains of acts of the defendants as follows ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Underwood v. Atlanta & W. P. R. Co.
...Ga. 555, 556, 83 S.E. 263, L.R.A.1915B, 1097; Mathis v. Fulton Industrial Corp., 168 Ga. 719, 721, 149 S.E. 35; Head v. Cigarette Sales Co., 188 Ga. 452, 460, 4 S.E.2d 203; State of Georgia v. Camp, 189 Ga. 209, 210, 6 S.E.2d 299; Moore v. Robinson, 206 Ga. 27, 40, 55 S.E.2d 711; Lamons v. ......
-
State ex rel. Graham v. Board of Examiners, 9094
...Tax Commission v. Flora Drug Co., 167 Miss. 1, 148 So. 373; Havens v. Attorney General, 91 N.H. 115, 14 A.2d 636; Head v. Cigarette Sales Co., 188 Ga. 452, 4 S.E.2d 203; Vending Machine Co. v Oklahoma Tax Commission, 183 Okl. 427, 82 P.2d 1069; Ploch v. City of St. Louis, 345 Mo. 1069, 138 ......
-
Johnson v. Halpin, 32231
...the enjoyment of a 'privilege' even though the constitution of that State does not specifically authorize a use tax. Head v. Cigarette Sales Co., 188 Ga. 452, 4 S.E.2d 203; Code of Ga. §§ 2-5402, 2-5403. Moreover, in other jurisdictions 'use taxes' have been referred to by the courts as 'pr......
-
National Linen Service Corp. v. Thompson, 38785
...classified as an excise tax, and the two may be computed separately and without relation to each other. See Head v. Cigarette Sales Co., 188 Ga. 452(2), 456, 4 S.E.2d 203. The foregoing view is reinforced with respect to the accounts receivable feature of this case, at least, by the followi......