Lapas attēli
PDF
ePub

IV. Your respondents further return that at the time of fixing the valuation of the special franchise of the relator herein, they had before them the report and supplemental reports of the relator heretofore filed with the Board according to law and in accordance with the request of the Board; also the complaint referred to in the petition herein.

Copies of the same are not hereto annexed on account of their voluminous character, but the same are hereby made a part of this return as if set out at length and may be considered on any trial or appeal herein as if attached to this return and may be used in whole or in part by either party to this proceeding. The same are on file with the State Board of Tax Commissioners and presumably duplicates thereof in the office of the relator or its attorney herein.

day of

.....

......

V. A notice in writing was duly given to the relator that the said State Board of Tax Commissioners would meet at its office in the City of Albany on the ..... 191, to hear and determine any complaint concerning said assessment. At the time fixed in said notion or to which the matter was adjourned, the relator appeared and filed certain papers and was heard by counsel. Copies of said papers being hereto attached as aforesaid.

VI. That the petitioner is in no wise aggrieved by the action of the State Board of Tax Commissioners in the premises and that the sum fixed by it as the valuation of its special franchises in the borough of city of is neither erroneous nor illegal, nor is the same an over-valuation of such special franchise in said borough.

.....

.....

[ocr errors]

That the rights, permission and franchises set out in the petition of the relator constitute a special franchise as the same is defined by the Tax Law, upon which the relator is subject to a special franchise tax, and do not constitute separate and distinct special franchises so that the valuation is required to be fixed separate and apart from each other.

VII. That your respondents have not knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the exact percentage in proportionate valuation of the assessment by the local authorities of the said borough of other real property in said borough for the year 191, and that your respondents have decided the sum of $............. to be the full and true value of the special franchises of the relator in the

said borough and valued the same for assessment at that sum, and your respondents deny that relator has been assessed at a higher proportionate valuation than the assessment of other special franchises assessed by them.

VIII. Your respondents further allege and return that at and previous to the time of making such assessment, they had before them certain facts and information other than those communicated to them on behalf of the relator. That at and previous to the time when the assessment and valuation of the special franchise of the relator was made by your respondents, they had made inquiry, examination and investigation as to the value of the special franchises of the relator in said borough. That such inquiry, examination and investigation was made by and on behalf of this Board through its agents and employees, who had obtained knowledge and information and formed opinion as to the value of the special franchise of the relator assessed and in connection therewith of the value of the property of the relator, real and personal, in said borough, it being impracticable by reason of the large number of special franchises assessed by your respondents for them to make personal examination of the property of this relator; and from such inquiry, examination and investigation, together with the papers and documents produced before it, it decided the value of the special franchise of the relator to be the full sum of $........ .... and it fixed the value of such special franchise for the purpose of assessment at the said sum of $............. which your respondents believe to be a just and true valuation and which they decided to be the sum at which the said special franchise of the relator was properly assessable for the year 191, after hearing the relator and after consideration of the matters presented by it as grounds for reduction.

IX. That your respondents allege and return that the petitioner was allowed in all respects the hearing provided for and contemplated by Section 44 of Article 2 of the Tax Law and alleges that the said relator had a full and fair hearing by its counsel orally and submitted and presented to the Board all documents and papers desired to be submitted by it.

X. That the facts pertinent and material, to show the value of the property assessed on the roll which were considered by your respondents and the grounds for the valuation of such special franchise

by them, included the value of the real estate of such corporation situate in the streets, highways and public places in said borough, aside from and irrespective of the use and right to use such streets, highways and public places together with the value of the use and the right to use said streets, highways and public places of said borough by the relator, as such value has been fixed and determined upon the evidence, papers and documents before said Board; which papers and documents give among other things the cost of the property, the income therefrom and other facts going to show the value thereof; and from examination, investigation and inquiry made by and on behalf of the said Board as to the value of said property. That in so assessing such special franchise and in arriving at the valuation thereof, your respondents have not included in such assessment and valuation any property except as is situate in, above, upon or running through the public streets or public places of said borough, including the franchises, rights, authority or permission to construct, operate and maintain its foundations, roadbed, substructures and superstructures, with their appliances in, above, upon, or through said streets and public places; nor have they included the value of the right to be or the franchise to be a corporation; nor have they included the value of the good will of the business carried on by it; nor have they included the value of any property other than that defined as a special franchise by subdivision 3 of section 2 of the Tax Law. That such assessment as made of such special franchises includes the value of the tangible and intangible property in said streets, and has been arrived at upon consideration of all the facts and circumstances affecting the value of said property, including the use or right to use said streets and public places, which your respondents have been able to ascertain.

known as city of

XI. That at the time the assessment complained of herein was made and at the present time the relator herein was and is operating railroad in the street and public highway Avenue, in the borough of ........ That such use and operation constitutes and is a special franchise as defined in subdivision 3, section 2 of the Tax Law as a special franchise, and this relator is and was at all of times aforesaid subject to taxation on the same and that the assessment thereof by these respondents was and is legal.

XII. Your respondents further return that they do not admit any

of the allegations in the petition except so far as the same are shown to be true by this return and the papers thereto annexed and referred to and forming a part thereof, and deny each and every allegation to the effect that the relator is not properly and legally assessed at the fair value of its special franchise.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, Chairman of the State Board of Tax Commissioners, has hereunto set his hand this .... day of

.....

191.

STATE OF NEW YORK,
County of

SS.:

...

Chairman.

being duly sworn, deposes and says: That he is Chairman of the State Board of Tax Commissioners; that he has read the foregoing return and knows the contents thereof; that the same is true to the knowledge of deponent, except as to those matters therein alleged to be stated on information and belief, and as to those matters he believes it to be true. Subscribed and sworn to before me

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

and

[ocr errors]

existing under the laws of the State of ...

that during the year ending October 31, 191, it was engaged in the business in the State of New York, and that (no) part of its capital was employed within the State of New York.

II. That on or before the 15th day of November, 191, it duly made a written report to the comptroller of the State of New York, as required by section 192 of the Tax Law, such report being in the form prescribed by said comptroller; and that said report showed the condition of said company at the close of its business on October 31, 191, and that in said report was stated the amount of its authorized capital stock, the amount of stock paid in, the entire amount of the capital of the corporation, and the capital employed by it in the State during the year ending October 31, 191 (the date and rate per cent. of each dividend declared during the year ending October 31, 191 which dividends amounted respectively to ... per cent., and per cent.) (or if no dividends were declared, that no dividends were declared during the year ending October 31, 191 ). III. That such report showed:

.....

(Here show details of the report, including the authorized capital stock, the capital employed within and without the State, the rate of dividends, etc.)

« iepriekšējāTurpināt »