Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. State Tax Commission

Utah Supreme Court

Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. State Tax Commission

384 P.2d 399, 14 Utah 2d 359, 1963 Utah LEXIS 224

Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. State Tax Commission. Read the opinion of the Court — 13 Utah 2d 113 →

Utah Supreme Court·Decided August 21, 1963·No. No. 9493·Published

Opinion

CALLISTER, Justice.

In a prior proceeding, this Court reviewed a sales tax deficiency levied by the State Tax Commission on the sale of pipe to a nonresident buyer at the seller’s foundry in Utah.¹ This Court held that the transaction was not subject to taxation under the commerce clause of the Federal Constitution.² That decision was reversed by the U. S. Supreme Court and the case remanded to this Court.³

We granted the taxpayer’s request to re-argue the case, but limited it to the question of whether the transaction was nontaxable under the regulations of the Tax Commission. This argument had been advanced in the prior proceeding before this Court and before the U. S. Supreme Court. Neither court ruled specifically upon the matter.

It is the taxpayer’s contention that under sales tax regulations promulgated by the [360]*360Tax Commission, and in effect at the time, the transaction was interstate and exempt from taxation. With this contention we disagree; but even if the regulations could be construed to provide such an exemption they would be out of harmony with and contrary to our statute 4 and the decision of the U. S. Supreme Court.⁵

For the foregoing reasons the order of the Tax Commission is:

Affirmed. No costs awarded.

HENRIOD, C. J., and McDONOUGH, CROCKETT and WADE, JJ., concur.

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

CALLISTER, Justice.

In a prior proceeding, this Court reviewed a sales tax deficiency levied by the State Tax Commission on the sale of pipe to a nonresident buyer at the seller’s foundry in Utah.¹ This Court held that the transaction was not subject to taxation under the commerce clause of the Federal Constitution.² That decision was reversed by the U. S. Supreme Court and the case remanded to this Court.³

We granted the taxpayer’s request to re-argue the case, but limited it to the question of whether the transaction was nontaxable under the regulations of the Tax Commission. This argument had been advanced in the prior proceeding before this Court and before the U. S. Supreme Court. Neither court ruled specifically upon the matter.

It is the taxpayer’s contention that under sales tax regulations promulgated by the [360]*360Tax Commission, and in effect at the time, the transaction was interstate and exempt from taxation. With this contention we disagree; but even if the regulations could be construed to provide such an exemption they would be out of harmony with and contrary to our statute 4 and the decision of the U. S. Supreme Court.⁵

For the foregoing reasons the order of the Tax Commission is:

Affirmed. No costs awarded.

HENRIOD, C. J., and McDONOUGH, CROCKETT and WADE, JJ., concur.

Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. State Tax Commission, 384 P.2d 399, 14 Utah 2d 359, 1963 Utah LEXIS 224 (Utah 1963).

Pincite

384 P.2d 399 (Pacific States Cast Iron Pipe Co. v. State Tax Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related