Legal Opinion

Gaddy v. Hummelstein Iron & Metal, Inc.

Supreme Court of Arkansas

Decided June 18, 1979No. 78-333PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

George Rose Smith, Justice.

Our compensating (or use) tax law contains an exemption for machinery that is directly used in manufacturing. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 84-3106 (D) (2) (Supp. 1977). The appellee Hummelstein buys and sells scrap metal. The state revenue department ruled that Hummelstein’s machinery is subject to the tax, for the reason that Hummelstein is not engaged in manufacturing. The appellee paid the tax under protest and brought this suit for recovery. This appeal is from a decree holding that Hummelstein is a manufacturer and is therefore entitled to claim the exemption.

The appellee…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Heath v. Westark Poultry Processing Corp.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1976
  2. Morley v. E. E. Barber Construction Co.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1952
  3. Scurlock v. HendersonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1954
  4. Arkansas Railway Equipment Co. v. HeathSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1975

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Ragland v. Arkansas Valley Coal Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Arkansas · 1982
  2. Walther v. Carrothers Construction Co. of Arkansas, LLCSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2016
  3. Walther v. Carrothers Construction Co. of Arkansas, LLCSupreme Court of Arkansas · 2016

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API