Appeal from the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Clarion County in case of In Re: Appeal of Margaret L. Amadio from Assessment of Board of Assessment and Revision of Taxes of Clarion County, Pennsylvania, No. 635 Term, 1976.
Al Lander, with him Dom W. Greco, for appellant.
Henry Ray Pope, III, for appellee.
Judges Mencer, Rogers and DiSalle, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge DiSalle.
This is an appeal from an order of the Court of Common Pleas of Clarion County dated February 7,
[ 37 Pa. Commw. Page 411977]
. The order dismissed the appeal filed by Margaret L. Amadio (Amadio) from a decision by the Board of Assessment and Revision of Taxes of Clarion County (Board), sustaining an occupational assessment levied against Amadio for the tax year 1976. We affirm.
The facts of this case are not in dispute. In 1976, Amadio received notice that she had been classified as "nurse-registered" for purposes of the occupation tax. She appealed this assessment to the Board and received a hearing on the matter on September 9, 1976. Upon consideration of the evidence presented, the Board dismissed Amadio's appeal. She appealed this decision to the lower court under Section 704 of The Fourth to Eighth Class County Assessment Law, Act of May 21, 1943, P.L. 571, as amended, 72 P.S. § 5453.704.
The lower court conducted a hearing on Amadio's appeal on November 30, 1976. At this hearing, Amadio conceded that she is a registered nurse. She stated that she performed services in this capacity as well as clerical duties during the afternoon hours in her husband's office, but that at no time was she ever paid wages or other compensation in return for her services. Her testimony also revealed that, on occasion, her husband, Dr. Angelo Amadio, received fees for services which were rendered exclusively by her in her professional capacity.*fn1 Finally, she stated that although her husband relied on her to come into work daily, he did not employ temporary help when she was sick or took a day off.
In its opinion, the lower court followed the recognized principle that an occupation tax identical for all members of a particular occupation is a valid tax.
As stated by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Banger's Appeal, 109 ...