Tuesday, September 01, 2015
Ind. Decisions - Tax Court posts one today, Sept. 1st
In Paul J. Elmer and Carol A. N. Elmer v. Indiana Department of Revenue, a 19-page opinion, Sr. Judge Fisher writes:
Paul J. Elmer and Carol A. N. Elmer have appealed the Indiana Department of State Revenue’s assessments of Indiana adjusted gross income tax (AGIT) for the 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2008 tax years (the years at issue). The matter is currently before the Court on the Department’s Motion for Summary Judgment. While the Department’s Motion presents three issues, the Court consolidates and restates them as: whether the Department, in determining the Elmers’ Indiana AGIT liability, erred in disallowing their business expense and uncollectible debt deductions. * * *
In this case, the parties’ designated evidence invites the Court to resolve factual disputes and conflicting inferences, assess the credibility of witnesses, and determine where the preponderance of the parties’ designated evidence lies. This, however, is improper because the summary judgment procedure is not a substitute for trial, a means for resolving factual disputes or conflicting inferences that arise from undisputed facts, or a tool for deciding where the preponderance of the evidence lies before the evidence has been fully presented. See Owens Corning Fiberglass Corp. v. Cobb, 754 N.E.2d 905, 909 (Ind. 2001); Egnatz v. Med. Protective Co., 581 N.E.2d 438, 439-40 (Ind. Ct. App. 1991). The Court, finding that there are genuine issues of material fact as to whether the Department, in determining the Elmers’ Indiana AGIT liability, erred in disallowing the Elmers’ business expense and uncollectible debt deductions for the years at issue, DENIES the Department’s Motion. The Court will order the parties to file a joint status report under separate cover.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on September 1, 2015 04:24 PM
Posted to Ind. Tax Ct. Decisions