Playmates Toys Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation

742 A.2d 968, 162 N.J. 186, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 1652
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedDecember 21, 1999
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 742 A.2d 968 (Playmates Toys Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Playmates Toys Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation, 742 A.2d 968, 162 N.J. 186, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 1652 (N.J. 1999).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division allowing the Director of the Division of Taxation to recover a refund mistakenly paid to a taxpayer after the statute of limitations had passed on the taxpayer’s right to seek a refund for overpayments in prior years. We do so substantially for the reasons stated by the Appellate Division in its opinion reported at 316 N.J.Super. 509, 720 A.2d 655 (1998). We add only that this judgment does not confer on the Division of Taxation an unlimited inherent authority to correct and revise erroneous tax determinations once made. The powers of the Division are not boundless. Rather, given the administrative history of the Division’s earlier determination (communicated to the taxpayer) that the taxpayer was not entitled to a refund because of the statute of limitations, the recovery of the funds here is more akin to the correction of a clerical error that led to the mailing of a tax refund check to which the taxpayer was not entitled, rather than the correction of an error in judgment. See Lockwood v. Walsh, 137 N.J. Eq. 445, 450, 45 A.2d 305 (Prerog.Ct.1946) (implying that State Tax Commissioner possesses inherent authority to correct error of mathematical calculation).

The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed.

For affirmance — Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices O’HERN, GARIBALDI, STEIN, COLEMAN, LONG and YERNIERO—

7.

Opposed — none.

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

Related

J & J Snack Foods Sales Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation
27 N.J. Tax 532 (New Jersey Tax Court, 2013)
Hill v. Director, Division of Taxation
27 N.J. Tax 311 (New Jersey Tax Court, 2013)
Borromeo v. DIFLORIO
976 A.2d 388 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2009)
Lenox, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation
20 N.J. Tax 464 (New Jersey Tax Court, 2002)
New Jersey Div. of Youth & Family Serv. v. Jy
800 A.2d 132 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2002)
New Jersey Department of Labor v. Pepsi-Cola Co.
784 A.2d 64 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2001)
State v. International Federation of Professional & Engineers, Local 195
780 A.2d 525 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2001)
State v. INTERN. FED., LOCAL
780 A.2d 525 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2001)
Quigley v. KPMG PEAT MARWICK, LIP
749 A.2d 405 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2000)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
742 A.2d 968, 162 N.J. 186, 1999 N.J. LEXIS 1652, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/playmates-toys-inc-v-director-division-of-taxation-nj-1999.