clear space clear space clear space white space
A
 r c h i v e s   o f   M a r y l a n d   O n l i n e

PLEASE NOTE: The searchable text below was computer generated and may contain typographical errors. Numerical typos are particularly troubling. Click “View pdf” to see the original document.

  Maryland State Archives | Index | Help | Search
search for:
clear space
white space
The Annotated Code of the Public Civil Laws of Maryland, 1911
Volume 372, Page 1869   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>
clear space clear space clear space white space

ART. 81] STATE TAX COMMISSIONED 1869

should be exempt from taxation. Held that gasometers and gas mains or
pipes belonging to, and in the use of, a gas company, were not exempt under
such ordinance. Consolidated Gas Co. v. Baltimore, 62 Md. 589.

This section referred to in deciding that manufacturing machinery was
not assessable as part of the realty—see notes to section 162. Anne Arundel
County v. Baltimore Sugar Refining Co., 99 Md. 486.

As to property exempt from taxation, see sec. 4; see also, sec. 162.

1904. art. 81, sec. 162. 1888, art. 81, sec. 144. 1878, ch. 178, sec. 152.
165. As soon as the state tax commissioner shall have valued and
assessed the shares in the several banks and other corporations in this
State he shall certify and return the said valuation to the comptroller of
the treasury, who shall at once proceed to notify the president, cashier
or other proper officer of such banks or other corporations of the said
valuation and assessment of their shares, respectively, by transmitting
to such president or other officer an account of the state taxes due from
such bank or other corporation under such valuation and assessment, by
mail under cover, fairly directed to such president or other officer, and
shall note in a book the date of placing in the mail the envelope or cover
containing such account. If no appeal be taken within thirty days from
such transmission the said valuation and assessment shall bo final; but
any such bank or corporation may, within thirty days after such notifi-
cation, appeal from such valuation to the comptroller of the treasury and
state treasurer, stating in such appeal the reasons and grounds of such
appeal; and said comptroller and treasurer shall consider the same, and
if the comptroller and treasurer shall both be of the opinion that such
valuation and assessment so make by the state tax commissioner is erro-
neous and ought to be changed, they shall change the same accordingly
and the valuation and assessment so agreed upon by the comptroller and
treasurer shall be final; but if either the comptroller or treasurer shall
agree with the state tax commissioner as to the correctness of the valua-
tion so made by him, then such appeal shall be dismissed, and the orig-
inal valuation shall be and remain as the true valuation of such shares.
Since this section makes the decision of the comptroller and treasurer
final, the court of appeals can not revise their Judgment or the amount of
the assessment. Relief may be granted by the court of appeals, however,
if property is assessed which is exempt, or if the legality of the method of
valuation is involved. And if property is taxed which is not taxable, the
corporation may resist collection of the tax without appealing to the comp-
troller and treasurer. Salisbury Bldg. Assn. v. Wicomico County, 86 Md.
618; Schley v. Lee, 106 Md. 404; Schley v. Montgomery County, 106 Md. 410;
Consolidated Gas Co. v. Baltimore, 101 Md. 558; Clark Distilling Co. v. Cumber-
land, 95 Md. 475; Crown Cork and Seal Co. v. State, 87 Md. 697; Consumers'
Ice Co. v. State, 82 Md. 139; Allegany County v. Union Mining Co., 61 Md.
548. Cf. Baltimore v. Canton Co., 63 Md. 238.

If the value of distilled spirits is included in the assessment of corporate
stock contrary to section 218, et seq., this section affords the remedy—see sec-
tion 221. If the distilling company omits to avail Itself of such remedy, the
circuit court will not afterwards review the action of the tax commissioner.
The shareholders have an opportunity to be heard through the corporation,
and, hence, the shareholders themselves are not entitled to notice of an
increased assessment—for this purpose, the corporation represents the share-
holders. Clark Distilling Co. v. Cumberland, 95 Md. 474; Corry v. Baltimore
96 Md. 321 (affirmed in 196 U. S. 466).

 

clear space
clear space
white space

Please view image to verify text. To report an error, please contact us.
The Annotated Code of the Public Civil Laws of Maryland, 1911
Volume 372, Page 1869   View pdf image (33K)
 Jump to  
  << PREVIOUS  NEXT >>


This web site is presented for reference purposes under the doctrine of fair use. When this material is used, in whole or in part, proper citation and credit must be attributed to the Maryland State Archives. PLEASE NOTE: The site may contain material from other sources which may be under copyright. Rights assessment, and full originating source citation, is the responsibility of the user.


Tell Us What You Think About the Maryland State Archives Website!



An Archives of Maryland electronic publication.
For information contact mdlegal@mdarchives.state.md.us.

©Copyright  November 18, 2025
Maryland State Archives