In Re Bowen

116 B.R. 477, 1990 Bankr. LEXIS 1511, 1990 WL 92436
CourtUnited States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. West Virginia
DecidedJune 14, 1990
DocketBankruptcy 87-20916
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 116 B.R. 477 (In Re Bowen) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. West Virginia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In Re Bowen, 116 B.R. 477, 1990 Bankr. LEXIS 1511, 1990 WL 92436 (W. Va. 1990).

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION ON MOTION FOR DETERMINATION OF TAX LIABILITY

RONALD G. PEARSON, Bankruptcy Judge.

Pending before the Court is Debtors’ amended motion for determination of tax liability and for an order voiding tax liens placed by the State of West Virginia. Debtor David Bowen is a responsible officer of the following five corporations: Bowen Land Development Co., Inc.; Bowen Pharmacy of Kanawha City, Inc.; Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc.; Bowen Reed Furniture Co. of Danville, Inc.; Colonial Wholesale, Inc. The West Virginia Tax Department has asserted claims personally against Mr. Bowen and against property of the estate for various taxes which the Tax Department states were owed by the corporations but unpaid.

At a hearing March 8, 1989, at which time attorneys for the Debtors and the Tax Department presented a Stipulation of Facts to be used by the Court in ruling on Debtors’ amended motion, the Court heard evidence on the issue of whether certain consumer sales tax and certain wage withholding tax returns were filed by Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc. The matter was taken under advisement by the Court. Supporting and response memoranda were filed by the parties.

The Court will first address the issue of whether certain tax returns listed in Paragraph 8 of the Stipulations were filed by Bowen Land Development Co., Inc., by Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc. and by Colonial Wholesale, Inc. The different claims will be identified and addressed by paragraph number below as they are addressed in numbered paragraphs of the Stipulation. The Stipulation is attached to and made a part of this Memorandum Opinion.

*479 Paragraph 8 Returns Alleged Not Filed

A hearing was held March 8, 1989 during which the Court heard arguments on whether certain tax returns listed in Paragraph 8 of the Stipulation were filed. Whether these returns were filed is critical to the collectibility of these alleged tax liabilities under State statutes limiting periods for assessment and collection of taxes where returns are filed.

The Tax Department states that its records do not reflect the filing of certain returns for Bowen Land Development Co., Inc., for Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc., or for Colonial Wholesale, Inc. Debtors do not dispute missing returns for Colonial Wholesale, Inc.

The Debtors presented Ivey Reed, who was the manager of Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc. during the period from June 12, 1982 through July, 1983. Mr. Reed testified that it was the general business practice of the corporation during that period to file all required tax returns, and he explained the system the corporation used to ensure that such returns were filed. Mr. Reed testified that, to the best of his recollection, he filed all returns due the state of West Virginia during his period as manager. In addition, Debtors produced evidence that a consumer sales tax return for Bowen Reed Furniture for January, 1985, which was reported by the computerized records of the Tax Department as not filed, was located in the files of the Tax Department. Debtors argue that this shows the Tax Department’s records are not complete.

The Tax Department presented Michael Garretson, a tax audit clerk with the Department, who had checked the Department’s computer records and found that several returns which should have been filed by Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc. did not appear to have been filed according to those records. He explained the procedure by which the Department enters returns into the Department’s computer system.

The Debtors introduced no tangible evidence that the alleged missing returns were filed except for a copy of one consumer sales tax return of Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc. for the period of January, 1985 found in the Department’s files. This return the Court accepts as filed. Concerning the other disputed returns, the Court is asked to decide on the basis of testimony regarding business practices of the two parties. Because it is the affirmative duty of the responsible officers of a corporation to see that the required business returns are filed, they must carry the burden of proving that statutory requirements of filing have been met. The Court accepts the Tax Department’s records as raising a re-buttable presumption that, except for the January, 1985 return found in the Tax Department’s files, the business organizations did not file returns for those periods in question. The Debtors, who had custody and control of the records of the businesses, presented no canceled checks, no check stubs, no office memoranda or any other tangible evidence that the disputed returns were filed. The Debtors, therefore, have failed to carry their burden of proof, and the Court finds that except for the January, 1985 consumer sales tax return of Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc., the returns listed in Paragraph 8 of the Stipulation were not filed.

Paragraph 4 Claims

As a result of a field audit of the books and records of Bowen Reed Furniture Co., Inc. performed by the Tax Department, taxes of $24,796.41 were assessed against the corporation and that assessment became final March 27, 1984, pursuant to W.Va.Code § 11-10-8. Because Bowen Reed Furniture Co. failed to pay the taxes assessed against it, the Tax Department issued a jeopardy assessment against the Debtors personally on April 1, 1987 for the furniture company’s consumer sales tax liability for the periqds of January, 1978 through August, 1983, and two later periods. Tax liability for the two later periods are not contested and will not be treated here. With additions and interest, the amount showing in the Stipulation as contested for the January, 1978 through August, 1983 periods totals $30,013.57. Pursuant to this Court’s finding in the preceding section of this Memorandum Opin *480 ion, returns for the periods from February, 1984 through April, 1984 are deemed not to have been filed. The return for January, 1985 is deemed filed.

The Debtors, citing West Virginia Code § 11-10-15, argue that the jeopardy assessment issued against them April 1, 1987 is void as to tax liabilities attributable to periods ending prior to April 1, 1984 because the period of limitations for assessing those tax liabilities had expired at the time of the jeopardy assessment. Section ll-10-15(a) provides that taxes shall be assessed within three years after the date the return was filed, but if a fraudulent return is filed to evade taxes, or if no return is filed, assessment may be made at any time.

West Virginia Code § ll-10-16(a) requires that where assessment is issued, every proceeding for - collection shall be commenced within five years after the date such assessment becomes final.

The Tax Department asserts that the Notice of Jeopardy Assessment issued against the Debtors April 1, 1987 was a collection action commenced within five years of the original assessment becoming final.

A plain reading of § 11-15-17 makes clear that as to officers of a corporation, payment in the amount of delinquent corporate sales tax and related liabilities is to be “enforced against them as against the association or corporation which they represent.” The West Virginia Code separately treats limitations on assessment and on collection in §§ 11-10-15 and 11-10-16. The West Virginia Code authorizes collection by foreclosure in § 11-10-12, or by levy and distraint in § 11-10-13.

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

Related

Schmehl v. Helton
662 S.E.2d 697 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 2008)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 B.R. 477, 1990 Bankr. LEXIS 1511, 1990 WL 92436, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-bowen-wvsb-1990.