United States Shoe Corp. v. Kosydar
Ohio Supreme Court
1DissentPaul W. Brown, J.
The decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, excepting from taxation the materials incorporated into sample shoes, and the dies, lasts, and other items used to produce those shoes, is neither unreasonable nor unlawful. Taxpayers’ position that their pur*74pose at the time of purchasing the materials was to incorporate them into shoes for sale by manufacturing is uncon-tradicted.
It is true that the initial use of the shoes in question was as sample products. However, at the time of purchase, and at all times thereafter, the taxpayers’ purpose was to incorporate the materials into shoes which were…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Ace Steel Baling, Inc. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1969
- Mead Corp. v. GlanderOhio Supreme Court · 1950
- Canton Malleable Iron Co. v. PorterfieldOhio Supreme Court · 1972
- Accountant's Computer Services, Inc. v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1973
- Koch v. KosydarOhio Supreme Court · 1972
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.