« Ind. Courts - More on "Hospital asks court to silence woman's criticism of patient care" | Main | Ind. Gov't. - "IURC review supports law judge's rulings" »

Tuesday, December 07, 2010

Ind. Decisions - NFP yesterday, FP today from Tax Court

Perhaps wrapping up before his retirement at the end of the month, Judge Fisher issued one NFP yesterday and a FP today.

In Shelby County Assessor v. Shelby's Landing-II, LP (NFP), a 9-page opinion, Judge Fisher affirms the final determination of the Indiana Board of Tax Review:

The act of valuing real property requires the formulation of an opinion; it is not an exact science. When there are competing opinions as to how a property should be valued, the Indiana Board determines which opinion is more probative. That determination is, essentially, the result of how effectively each party has persuaded the Indiana Board that its evidence is more credible and reliable than that of the other. Here, the Indiana Board’s final determination plainly evidences that it found Shelby LP’s overall evidentiary presentation to be more persuasive than that of the Assessor’s. In presenting her arguments on appeal, the Assessor essentially asks the Court to reweigh the evidence and find in her favor. This, however, the Court cannot do. Given that the Indiana Board’s final determination is supported by substantial evidence, this Court cannot say that it erred in valuing Shelby LP’s two apartment complexes at $3,742,500 for the year at issue.
In Indiana Dept. of Revenue v. Estate of Bernard A. Daugherty, a 14-page opinion, Judge Fisher writes:
The Indiana Department of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Division (Department) appeals the Knox Circuit Court’s (probate court) order determining the inheritance tax liability of the Estate of Bernard A. Daugherty (Estate). The Estate has filed a cross-appeal. These appeals present three issues for the Court’s review: I. Whether the probate court erred in denying the Estate’s motion to dismiss; II. Whether the probate court’s conclusion that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the Estate’s counterclaim was in error; and III. Whether the probate court erred in approving twelve deductions for farming-related expenses pursuant to Indiana Code § 6-4.1-3-13. * * *

For the above stated reasons, the Court AFFIRMS, in part, and REVERSES, in part, the probate court’s order. The Court therefore REMANDS the case to the probate court for calculation of the proper amount of inheritance tax and interest due from the Estate, consistent with this opinion.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on December 7, 2010 03:11 PM
Posted to Ind. Tax Ct. Decisions