Legal Opinion

Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co. v. Kosydar

Ohio Supreme Court

Decided April 24, 1974No. 73-885PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHbRbbbt, J.

Under R. C. 5739.02, an excise tax is levied on all retail sales made in this state. Similarly, R. C. 5741.-02 imposes an excise tax upon the storage, use or other consumption of tangible personal property within the state. The use tax, however, is not so levied: if the acquisition of such property, if made in Ohio, would be a sale not subject to the retail sales tax levied by R. C. 5739.01 to R. C. 5739.-31, inclusive. R. C. 5741.02(C)(2).

R. C. 5739.01 operates to except a number of transactions from the levy of the sales tax. R. C. 5739.01(E)(2) provides, in part:

“ (E) ‘Retail sale’ and…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Canton Malleable Iron Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972
  2. Ohio Edison Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1971

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Newman v. LevinOhio Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Cleveland Electric Illuminating Co. v. LindleyOhio Supreme Court · 1982
  3. East Ohio Gas Co. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1991
  4. UAH-Hydro Kennebec, L.P. v. State Tax AssessorSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1995
  5. Pittsburgh & Conneaut Dock Co. v. LimbachOhio Supreme Court · 1985

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API