Skip to content Skip to sidebar Skip to footer

Widget HTML #1

(DOWNLOAD) "Beeman v. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene" by Court of Special Appeals of Maryland # eBook PDF Kindle ePub Free

Beeman v. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene

📘 Read Now     📥 Download


eBook details

  • Title: Beeman v. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene
  • Author : Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
  • Release Date : January 02, 1995
  • Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
  • Pages : * pages
  • Size : 77 KB

Description

On report. This was an appeal from the decision of the assessors of the Town of Houlton declining to abate a portion of taxes assessed to the appellant, Dead River Company, a corporation which was for purposes of taxation as of April 1, 1951 an inhabitant of the City of Bangor. Appellant maintains a place of business in Houlton, where a wholesale and retail oil business is conducted and where it buys some wood. Included in the assessment was an item of ties and lumber valued at $350 and producing a tax of $28.35. Actually this personal property comprised 35 cords of pulpwood and 200 ties. Some time in early April of 1951 and again in the middle of June, a Houlton assessor conferred with a corporate officer acting for appellant, who told the assessor of the existence of the ties and pulpwood, their value and location in Houlton. A rough list of the items in question and their value was prepared and retained by the assessor. At these conferences the position of the appellant was that, although it was the owner of the items, they were in transit and therefore claimed not taxable in Houlton. After receipt of the tax bill, the appellant by its counsel on November 24, 1951 filed application for abatement and by letter indicated that the pulpwood and ties were deemed manufactured lumber in transit. On December 3, 1951 counsel by letter advised the assessors that the ties were the property of another company, and that the pulpwood was destined for a specific mill owned by a third party in another town to be manufactured therein. We find no satisfactory explanation in the evidence as to exactly when the appellant determined that it was not the owner, what basis of reasons, if any, it had for such determination, or what may have occurred, if anything, to cause accident or mistake with regard to title.


Free PDF Download "Beeman v. Department of Health & Mental Hygiene" Online ePub Kindle