C. W. Leggett Co. v. State Tax Commissioner
Opinion of the Court
The claimant, the' C. W. Leggett Company, located at Clarks-burg, West Virginia, seeks reimbursement in the sumí of $565.64, which amount had heretofore been paid in various sums, beginning with the year 1924 and including the year 1936, in excess of its'legal business and occupation tax, known as the gross sales tax, due and; payable" to the state for the period designated. A demand; for refund of such excessive payments has heretofore been duly and legally made to the tax commissioner of the state of West Virginia, and this official; upon being petitioned to requisition the auditor of the state for- a warrant refunding the" said "amounts, refused the said petition on thé’grounds that theré were ño aváilable funds out of which the'sáid excessive"payinénts Cotild be paid.
Dissenting Opinion
dissenting.
The above case came to the court of claims from the state tax commissioner under the “shortened procedure” provision of the court act. The record was prepared by the tax commissioner and filed with the clerk September 15, 1942. It was placed upon the special docket of the court for its regular October 1942 term and is considered informally upon the record submitted. It appears from this record that pursuant to article 13, chapter 11, of the official code of West Virginia, relating to business and occupation, formerly known as the gross sales tax law, claimant C. W. Leggett Company paid taxes to the state of West Virginia as follows:
1924 _ ; 12.50
1925 . 17.91
1926 . 22.79
1927 _ 18.64
1928 . 22.82
1929 _ 23.40
1930 . 31.00
1931 . 31.69
1932 . 5.51
1933 . 2.79
1933 _ 54.04
1934 . 96.18
1935-. 103.36
1936 . 122.01
565.64 Total
During the period that Honorable Fred L. Fox and Honorable Ernest K. James, respectively, served as state tax commissioner one of the rules and regulations of the tax commissioner’s office provided that persons maintaining a place of business in West Virginia for the purpose of representing out-of-state suppliers of merchandise on a commission basis and obtaining orders for the shipment from such out-of-state suppliers to customers in West Virginia were not liable for payment of the West Virginia business and occupation (formerly gross sales) tax on their gross commissions because such transactions were considered exempt from the payment of state taxes under the interstate commerce clause of the Federal Constitution.
By reason, however, of a decision of the Supreme Court of Alabama, in the case of State v. Stein, reported in 199 Southern, page 13, the above mentioned rule and regulation was abrogated and annulled for the reason that said case held that commissions earned by reason of transactions above mentioned were not exempt under the commerce clause of the Federal Constitution.
In advising all such commission merchants in West Virginia of this fact it was ascertained by the tax commissioner that those claiming refund, including the above claimant and others, did pay business and occupation tax on commissions received from interstate shipments when at the time said tax payment was made said taxpayers were exempt from the payment of
For the reason that what the tax commissioner conceives to have been an erroneous tax payment made by claimant more than two years prior to the application for refund he is barred from making said refund by reason of section 655 (1) (2a) of article 1 chapter 11 of the 1941 supplement to the West Virginia code, which reads as follows:
“On and after the effective date of this section, any taxpayer claiming to be aggrieved through being required to pay any tax into the treasury of this state, may, within two years from the dáte of such payment, and not after, file with the official or department through which the tax was paid, a petition in writing to have refunded to him any such tax, or any part thereof, the payment whereof is claimed by him to have been required unlawfully; and if, on such petition, and the proofs filed in support thereof, the official collecting the same shall be of the opinion that the payment of the tax collected, or any part thereof was improperly required, he shall refund the same to the taxpayer by the issuance of his or its requisition on the treasurer; and the auditor shall issue his warrant on the treasurer therefor, payable to the taxpayer entitled to the refund, and the treasurer shall pay such warrant out of the fund into which the amount so refunded was originally paid:- Provided, however, That no refund shall be. made, at any time, on any claim involving the assessed valuation or appraisement of property which was fixed at the time the tax was originally paid.”
However, beginning with the year 1942 and for all subsequent years the tax commissioner will collect business and
I do not think that the case as presented by the record authorizes an award for reimbursement of the taxes paid by claimant. It is, I think, the law that where a tax is illegal the aid of a court of equity may be invoked to prevent the coilection of said tax. The taxes which claimant seeks to have reimbursed were voluntarily paid. Such payments were not
If claimant, felt aggrieved on account of paying the taxes in question it. hail 1 hi' right under the statide above set forth, within two years from the date of such payments, and not after that time, to apply to the official or department through which such taxes were paid for redress and relief authorized by such statute. It. did not. see lit to pursue such remedy. It is now barred by the statute of limitation from doing so. For such reason the tax commissioner could make no refund. For the same reason the court of claims is without jurisdiction to make an award in its favor.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.