Natchez Inv. Co. v. City of Natchez
| Decision Date | 25 November 1929 |
| Docket Number | 28177 |
| Citation | 155 Miss. 473,124 So. 654 |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
| Parties | NATCHEZ INV CO. v. CITY OF NATCHEZ |
APPEAL from circuit court of Adams county, HON. R. L. CORBAN, Judge.
Hotel property of the Natchez Investment Company in the city of Natchez was assessed for municipal taxes, and the assessment was approved by the city. On appeal to the circuit court, judgment was rendered for the city, and the taxpayer appeals. Affirmed in part, and reversed in part.
Judgment affirmed in part, and reversed in part.
Chas F. Engle and John Dale, both of Natchez, for appellant.
The exemption statute constituted an invitation from the legislature to capital to invest in hotels and authorized an exemption of permanent hotels, and at that time, as the jurisprudence in this state stood, it was reasonable to assume that in construing the term "permanent hotel" that this court would give this phrase the same character of construction which the court had given to the statute in construing the phrase "permanent factories."
In construing that phrase this court held that the phrase "permanent factories" means "all of the real estate, buildings, machinery, improvements and equipments forming a part of and belonging to the plant, or any personal property forming a part of the plant, essential to, and necessarily used in its operation." Not only the land on which the hotel stands should be declared exempt from taxation, but this court should recede from its decision in the Bolivar county case of Board of Supervisors of Bolivar County v. Merck & Alston, 120 So. 839. At the time the Eola Hotel was built a rule of property had been established as to the construction of exemption statutes.
Adams County v. National Box Co., 88 So. 168.
W. C Martin, of Natchez, for appellee.
An exemption from taxation will never be presumed and the burden is on one claiming such an exemption to establish clearly his right thereto.
Board of Supervisors v. Merck & Alston, 120 So. 839.
If an exemption from taxation is granted it should not be enlarged by construction, since the presumption is that the state has granted all it intended to grant.
Barnes v. Jones, 139 Miss. 675, 103 So. 773, 43 A.L.R. 673.
The state has granted an exemption to a "hotel" by the terms of the act, and the word "hotel" does not include the real estate under the hotel.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the circuit court of Adams county, holding that the furnishings in and the lot on which the Eola Hotel in the city of Natchez stands are liable for municipal taxes. From that judgment appellant, the owner of the hotel, prosecutes this appeal.
The lot on which the Eola Hotel stands, and the furnishings in the hotel, were assessed for municipal taxes for the city of Natchez for the year 1928. When the assessment roll came before the board of mayor and aldermen of the city for equalization and approval, appellant, the owner of the hotel, protested against such assessment, on the ground that, under the law, the lot and furnishings were exempt from municipal taxes. The mayor and board of aldermen passed an order rejecting appellant's protest, and approved the assessment. From that order, appellant appealed to the circuit court, where the cause was tried on agreed facts embodied in the record in writing, which agreement, leaving off the formal parts, follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial