Montreal Mining Co. v. State

• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court
• Writing for the Court: WINSLOW
• Citation: Montreal Mining Co. v. State, 155 Wis. 245, 144 N.W. 195 (Wis. 1913)
• Decision Date: 09 December 1913
• Parties: MONTREAL MINING CO. v. STATE.

155 Wis. 245

144 N.W. 195

MONTREAL MINING CO.

v.STATE.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Dec. 9, 1913.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Dane County; E. Ray Stevens, Judge.

Action by the Montreal Mining Company against the State of Wisconsin. Judgment for defendant, and plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.Lines, Spooner, Ellis & Quarles, of Milwaukee, for appellant.

W. C. Owen, Atty. Gen., and Walter Drew, Deputy Atty. Gen., for the State.

WINSLOW, C. J.

The plaintiff, a Wisconsin corporation, brings this action against the state in the circuit court of Dane county to recover an income tax levied against it for the year 1912, which is claimed to have been unlawfully levied. A general demurrer to the complaint was sustained, and the plaintiff appeals.

The plaintiff's claim is that the action is authorized by section 1087m13, Statutes 1911 (being one of the sections of the income tax law), which provides as follows: “Any corporation, joint-stock company or association subject to assessment by the state tax commission, feeling aggrieved by the decision of said commission regarding the assessment of its income, shall be granted the same rights of hearing and appeal as are now granted corporations assessed by said commission.” Unless this section authorizes the present action, it is conceded that it cannot be maintained. The section is not accurately worded nor as clear in its meaning as might be wished, but we are well satisfied that it does not refer to an action to recover taxes illegally levied but rather to a review before the tax commission of its preliminary decision as to the amount of income upon which the corporation must pay an income tax. The three sections which immediately precede it provide for the determination and assessmentof all incomes on or after January 1st in each year and for the manner of making returns both by individuals and corporations, as well as for the penalties for fraudulent or incorrect returns. By section 1087m10 it is provided that the assessment of corporations and joint-stock companies shall be made by the state tax commission and the assessment of persons by the county assessors. By section 1087m11 it is provided that, if it appears from evidence before the tax commission that any corporation has made incorrect or incomplete returns during the preceding three years, the tax commission may require of the corporation additional information and may make additions to the assessment for the current year to correct such previous errors and shall give notice in writing of such increase to the corporation. Section 1087m12 makes similar provisions with regard to the incomes of persons. Then follows section 1087m13, already quoted. The six sections immediately following contain full and precise provisions regulating the appointment of a county board of review, before whom all complaints as to the assessment of personal incomes by county assessors can be made, and provide for an appeal from the decisions of that board of review to the state tax commission.

The position of the section in controversy is very persuasive as to its intent. It is placed exactly in the position where a provision for review of the assessment would naturally be placed. Unless it be construed to mean such a review, then no review of an assessment once made by the commission is provided for, although the Legislature has been...