Botkins Grain & Feed Co. v. Lindley
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtBrogan, J.
The sole issue in this cause is whether appellee is a construction contractor with respect to the sales of livestock capsules.
R.C. 5741.02(A) imposes an excise tax “on the storage, use or other consumption in this state of tangible personal property.” However, pursuant to R.C. 5741.02(C)(2), this tax is not applicable to property, the acquisition of which, if made in this state, would not be subject to the tax levied upon retail sales under R.C. Chapter 5739.
Generally, as provided by R.C. 5739.01(E), those sales in which the consumer’s purpose is to “resell the thing transferred in the form…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Al Johnson Construction Co. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1975
- Reed v. County Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1949
- Shutter Bug, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1974
- Bobb Bros. v. Board of RevisionOhio Supreme Court · 1976
- R. Wantz & Sons Construction Co. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1974
3Cited by7 opinions
- American National Can Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- Jennings & Churella Construction Co. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1984
- Am. Natl. Can Co. v. TracyOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- J.C. Penney Co. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1986
- Foto Fair International, Inc. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1982
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.