Gahanna Heights, Inc. v. Porterfield
Ohio Supreme Court
1Per curiam
Appellant’s contention in this court is that the decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, that the Tax Commissioner was correct in applying the “302 Computation Directive,” is unreasonable and unlawful.
*190In order for the book value of capital assets to be prima facie evidence of true value for personal property tax purposes, a taxpayer must establish a depreciation account on the books of the corporaton which “is regularly and consistently credited with depreciation under some generally recognised method of reflecting depreciation of the taxpayer’s personal property.” Wheeling Steel Corp. v.…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Wheeling Steel Corp. v. EvattOhio Supreme Court · 1944
3Cited by11 opinions
- Aluminum Co. of America v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- PPG Industries, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1981
- Monsanto Co. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1978
- Syro Steel Co. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1973
- Heimerl v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1980
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.