Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

BORG-WARNER CORPORATION v. BOARD FINANCE AND REVENUE. TEXTRON (03/14/67)

decided: March 14, 1967.

BORG-WARNER CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF FINANCE AND REVENUE. TEXTRON, INC., APPELLANT, V. BOARD OF FINANCE AND REVENUE



Appeals from orders of Board of Finance and Revenue, Docket No. M-17,740, in case of Borg-Warner Corporation v. Board of Finance and Revenue; and Docket No. M-17,808, in case of Textron, Inc. v. Same.

COUNSEL

Harry J. Rubin, with him Krekstein and Rubin, for appellant.

Vincent X. Yakowicz, Deputy Attorney General, with him Walter E. Alessandroni, Attorney General, for Commonwealth, appellee.

Bell, C. J., Musmanno, Jones, Eagen, O'Brien and Roberts, JJ. Opinion by Mr. Justice O'Brien. Mr. Justice Cohen took no part in the consideration or decision of these appeals.

Author: O'brien

[ 424 Pa. Page 344]

The legal issues in these two cases being identical, and the only points of difference being factual, the companion cases captioned Borg-Warner Corporation v. Board of Finance and Revenue, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and Textron, Inc. v. Board of Finance and Revenue, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, were consolidated for argument before this Court.

In both cases, the appellants, Borg-Warner Corp. and Textron, Inc., purchased tracts of realty, and at the time the deeds were recorded, affixed realty transfer stamps. Thereafter, the Dept. of Revenue, ascertaining that the proper tax had not been paid, made assessments for additional realty transfer tax against the appellants. The appellants then filed petitions for redetermination with the Dept. of Revenue, and later, petitions for review with the Board of Finance and Revenue. Appellants' petitions were refused, and, following this refusal, appellants filed their respective appeals with the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County.

[ 424 Pa. Page 345]

Prior to argument of their respective appeals, appellants and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania entered into stipulations for judgment terminating the appeals.*fn1 Appellants therein agreed to abandon their contentions that the determination made by the Commonwealth was illegal and improper and agreed to a recomputed amount of tax due the Commonwealth

[ 424 Pa. Page 346]

(the amount due was set forth in the agreement) and the prothonotary was directed to enter the judgments of record. The respective judgments were subsequently paid and satisfied of record.

In 1963, appellant (Borg-Warner Corp.) filed a petition for refund with the Board of Finance and Revenue. Appellant concluded its petition by contending that if a favorable decision to appellant was forthcoming in a case (Commonwealth v. Sheraton-Midcontinent Corporation) then pending before the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County, a refund should be granted to the appellant. This same procedure was followed by Textron, Inc.

Subsequent to appellants' respective petitions to the Board of Finance and Revenue, the Court of Common Pleas of Dauphin County handed down its decision in Commonwealth v. Sheraton-Midcontinent Corp., 34 Pa. D. & C. 2d 73, 82 Dauph. 336 (1964), holding that an assessment of realty transfer tax could not be made by the Commonwealth under The Realty Transfer Tax Act of December 27, 1951, P. L. 1742, as amended, with regard to any transaction occurring prior to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.