Remington Cash Register Co. v. State Board of Taxes

152 A. 330, 8 N.J. Misc. 875, 1930 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 37
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedNovember 22, 1930
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 152 A. 330 (Remington Cash Register Co. v. State Board of Taxes) 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
Remington Cash Register Co. v. State Board of Taxes, 152 A. 330, 8 N.J. Misc. 875, 1930 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 37 (N.J. 1930).

Opinion

Pee Cukiam.

Certain cash registers sold by the prosecutor under conditional bills of sale to various purchasers in the city of Newark were assessed for taxes to the conditional vendors by the taxing authorities of the city.

The amount of the assessment is not in dispute. Upon appeal, the county board of taxation, and the state board of taxes and assessment, affirmed the assesment.

It was urged before such boards, and here, that the sales, being conditional, the title was in the vendee subject to being divested for non-payment of the installments of consideration and that the transactions were analogous to those of a chattel 'mortgage, the vendees being the owners, who might under the terms of the Tax act, require exemption to the extent of the mortgage debt.

We think neither of these grounds is tenable. Taking up the latter ground first, the party assessed has not taken advantage of such provision of the act and therefore is not entitled to the benefit thereof. Nor may the prosecutor succeed upon the first ground. Upon and under its conditional bills of sale it specifically reserved title and ownership in itself.

Under Pamph. L. 1918, ch. 236, all property shall be assessed to the owners thereof and “all tangible personal property shall be assessed in and for the taxing district where such property is found.”

Pursuant to such requirements of the statute the assessment in question was made, and we think properly.

If there be need for any proof of this the conditional sales agreements contain it, inasmuch as they provide—“undersigned, [purchaser] agrees to pay all taxes on the register, and in event of default to reimburse you for all taxes paid on same by you.”

The assessment will be affirmed and the writ dismissed, with costs.

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

Related

Alban Tractor Co. v. State Tax Commission
150 A.2d 456 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1959)
Duke Power Co. v. Hillsborough Township
26 A.2d 713 (New Jersey Tax Court, 1942)
Municipal Acceptance Corp. v. Canole.
119 S.W.2d 820 (Supreme Court of Missouri, 1938)
Manistee Iron Works Co. v. Township of Raritan
170 A. 39 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1934)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
152 A. 330, 8 N.J. Misc. 875, 1930 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 37, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/remington-cash-register-co-v-state-board-of-taxes-nj-1930.