Legal Opinion

Commissioner of Revenue v. Purity Supreme, Inc.

Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court

Decided December 5, 1985PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtNolan, J.

The sole issue in this case is whether the Appellate Tax Board (board) erred in reversing the denials by the Commissioner of Revenue (Commissioner) of the applications for abatement of Purity Supreme, Inc. (Purity), in an amount representing that portion of assessed taxes attributable to the purchase of “compositions” from an advertising agency and used by newspapers for Purity’s advertisements. We hold that the board committed no error and that Purity was entitled to an abatement.

Crucial to the issue is an understanding of the nature of a “composition” as that term is used in the production…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. State Tax CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1976
  2. Courier Citizen Co. v. Commissioner of Corporations & TaxationMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1971
  3. DiStefano v. Commissioner of RevenueMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1985
  4. Houghton Mifflin Co. v. State Tax CommissionMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1977
  5. Commissioner of Revenue v. Fashion Affiliates, Inc.Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1982

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Horvitz v. Commissioner of RevenueMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2001
  2. Lowell Sun Publishing Co. v. Commissioner of RevenueMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1986
  3. In Re Healthco International, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Massachusetts · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API