State Revenue Commission v. Bradley Co.

Court of Appeals of Georgia

State Revenue Commission v. Bradley Co.

173 S.E. 438, 48 Ga. App. 480, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 105

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedFebruary 12, 1934

Docket22586

StatusPublished

This text of 173 S.E. 438 (State Revenue Commission v. Bradley Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State Revenue Commission v. Bradley Co., 173 S.E. 438, 48 Ga. App. 480, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 105 (Ga. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Guerry, J.

The Supreme Court, in answer to certified questions propounded by this court, held: “Under section 10 of the sales-tax act of August 29, 1929 (Ga. L. 1929, pp. 103, 108), bale cotton is exempt from the operation of the act, not only while it is in the producer’s hands in its original package, but also while it is in the hands of a purchaser in its original package or state.” 178 Ga. 215 (172 S. E. 558). Under that ruling the State tax board properly held that bales of cotton in the original package or state were exempt from the sales-tax act in the hands of a purchaser, — W. p. Bradley Company.

2. The foregoing ruling being controlling, the practice questions will not be decided.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

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

Guerry, J.

The Supreme Court, in answer to certified questions propounded by this court, held: “Under section 10 of the sales-tax act of August 29, 1929 (Ga. L. 1929, pp. 103, 108), bale cotton is exempt from the operation of the act, not only while it is in the producer’s hands in its original package, but also while it is in the hands of a purchaser in its original package or state.” 178 Ga. 215 (172 S. E. 558). Under that ruling the State tax board properly held that bales of cotton in the original package or state were exempt from the sales-tax act in the hands of a purchaser, — W. p. Bradley Company.

2. The foregoing ruling being controlling, the practice questions will not be decided.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, C. J., and MacIntyre, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

173 S.E. 438, 48 Ga. App. 480, 1934 Ga. App. LEXIS 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-revenue-commission-v-bradley-co-gactapp-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack