Media Graphics, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Media Graphics, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation

8 N.J. Tax 321

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedMarch 13, 1986

StatusPublished

Cited by10 cases

This text of 8 N.J. Tax 321 (Media Graphics, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Media Graphics, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation, 8 N.J. Tax 321 (N.J. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from the March 26, 1985 judgment of the Tax Court upholding the assessment by defendant of sales tax on two activities of plaintiff fully described in a stipulation of facts filed below. The first activity, held taxable pursuant to N.J.S.A. 54:32B-3(a), involved printing materials in New Jersey for out-of-state customers, putting them in envelopes, addressing them as requested by the customers, and mailing them at a U.S. Post Office in New Jersey for delivery to addresses outside New Jersey. The second activity, held taxable pursuant to N.J.S.A. 54:32B-3(b)(5), involved purchasing of advertising materials by plaintiff instead of printing them and then handling same as in the case of the printed materials. We are [323]*323completely satisfied with the determination of the Tax Court and therefore affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Richard M. Conley in his opinion, reported at 7 N.J.Tax 23 (Tax Ct.1984). We add simply that although there can be no equitable estoppel against defendant under the facts of this case (see Airwork Ser. Div., etc. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 97 N.J. 290, 478 A.2d 729 (1984)), we are in full agreement with Judge Conley’s further determination (from which defendant has not cross-appealed) to vacate the previously imposed penalty and reduce interest to the minimum statutory rate.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals from the March 26, 1985 judgment of the Tax Court upholding the assessment by defendant of sales tax on two activities of plaintiff fully described in a stipulation of facts filed below. The first activity, held taxable pursuant to N.J.S.A. 54:32B-3(a), involved printing materials in New Jersey for out-of-state customers, putting them in envelopes, addressing them as requested by the customers, and mailing them at a U.S. Post Office in New Jersey for delivery to addresses outside New Jersey. The second activity, held taxable pursuant to N.J.S.A. 54:32B-3(b)(5), involved purchasing of advertising materials by plaintiff instead of printing them and then handling same as in the case of the printed materials. We are [323]*323completely satisfied with the determination of the Tax Court and therefore affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Richard M. Conley in his opinion, reported at 7 N.J.Tax 23 (Tax Ct.1984). We add simply that although there can be no equitable estoppel against defendant under the facts of this case (see Airwork Ser. Div., etc. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 97 N.J. 290, 478 A.2d 729 (1984)), we are in full agreement with Judge Conley’s further determination (from which defendant has not cross-appealed) to vacate the previously imposed penalty and reduce interest to the minimum statutory rate.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

8 N.J. Tax 321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/media-graphics-inc-v-director-division-of-taxation-njsuperctappdiv-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack