Wholesale Fence, Inc. v. New York State Department of Taxation & Finance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Wholesale Fence, Inc. v. New York State Department of Taxation & Finance

151 A.D.2d 488, 543 N.Y.S.2d 331, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7407

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJune 5, 1989

StatusPublished

This text of 151 A.D.2d 488 (Wholesale Fence, Inc. v. New York State Department of Taxation & Finance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Wholesale Fence, Inc. v. New York State Department of Taxation & Finance, 151 A.D.2d 488, 543 N.Y.S.2d 331, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7407 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to compel the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance to issue a satisfaction of certain claims for sales and use taxes and penalties and interest, and to remove certain tax liens against the petitioner’s property, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Amann, J.), dated January 25, 1988, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

[489]*489Upon our review of the agreement settling the parties’ dispute concerning the extent of the petitioner’s sales tax liability, we find that its provisions did not waive the imposition of penalty and interest in addition to the agreed-upon amount of sales tax due and owing. Under these circumstances, we further find that the respondent is not equitably estopped from recovering penalty and interest (see, ScruggsLeftwich v Rivercross Tenants’ Corp., 70 NY2d 849; Matter of Daleview Nursing Home v Axelrod, 62 NY2d 30). Accordingly, the court properly dismissed the petition.

We have reviewed the petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Kooper, JJ., concur.

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

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 to compel the New York State Department of Taxation and Finance to issue a satisfaction of certain claims for sales and use taxes and penalties and interest, and to remove certain tax liens against the petitioner’s property, the petitioner appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Richmond County (Amann, J.), dated January 25, 1988, which dismissed the petition.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, with costs.

[489]*489Upon our review of the agreement settling the parties’ dispute concerning the extent of the petitioner’s sales tax liability, we find that its provisions did not waive the imposition of penalty and interest in addition to the agreed-upon amount of sales tax due and owing. Under these circumstances, we further find that the respondent is not equitably estopped from recovering penalty and interest (see, ScruggsLeftwich v Rivercross Tenants’ Corp., 70 NY2d 849; Matter of Daleview Nursing Home v Axelrod, 62 NY2d 30). Accordingly, the court properly dismissed the petition.

We have reviewed the petitioner’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Mangano, J. P., Brown, Rubin and Kooper, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

151 A.D.2d 488, 543 N.Y.S.2d 331, 1989 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wholesale-fence-inc-v-new-york-state-department-of-taxation-finance-nyappdiv-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack