General Motors Corp. v. Kosydar

322 N.E.2d 631, 41 Ohio St. 2d 36, 70 Ohio Op. 2d 120, 1975 Ohio LEXIS 416
Ohio Supreme Court·Decided January 29, 1975·No. No. 74-256·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Appellant characterizes the single issue before this court as “the exception of the Disamatic machine from the levy of sales and use taxes by virtue of Sections 5739.01(E)(2) and 5741.02(C)(2).”

Appellant’s argument is that the Disamatic machine functions as an integral part of the complete castings manufacturing process; i. e., it is a part of a single integrated system and that, as such, it is used directly in manufacturing and, therefore, excepted from sales and use taxes by virtue of R. C. 5739.01(E)(2) and 5741.02(C)(2).

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

General Motors Corp. v. Kosydar, 322 N.E.2d 631, 41 Ohio St. 2d 36, 70 Ohio Op. 2d 120, 1975 Ohio LEXIS 416 (Ohio 1975).

322 N.E.2d 631 (General Motors Corp. v. Kosydar) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Canton Malleable Iron Co. v. Porterfield
283 N.E.2d 434 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1972)
Ohio Ferro-Alloys Corp. v. Kosydar
296 N.E.2d 533 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1973)
National Lime & Stone Co. v. Kosydar
311 N.E.2d 899 (Ohio Supreme Court, 1974)