Majority
Headnote
1. Taxation — Corporation Tax—Exemptions — Manufacturing Corpora-' TIONS.CHASE, J.
The relator is a domestic corporation. It was organized on February 8, 1898, to “make and execute contracts for public and private work of all kinds, including the laying of pavements of asphalt, brick, stone, or any other material; to import, export, manufacture, purchase, sell and deal in asphalt, and asphaltic products, and paving and construction materials and supplies of all kinds; and in general to undertake and carry on all kinds of construction work. * * *” The relator’s capital stock of $300,000 was all issued “for ■contract agreements, retained percentages, and plant.” The retained percentages were amounts unpaid on contracts that had been completed by the corporation which transferred such percentages to the relator. Such retained percentages so transferred amounted to $120,000 or $125,000. The business actually conducted by the relator during the years 1898 and 1899 was making and laying asphalt pavements. The re
This court has held that making the paving compound is the production of a new and distinct substance, which constitutes manufacturing, within the meaning of section 183 of the tax law, Laws 1896, p. 857, c. 908, as amended by Laws 1897, p. 817, c. 785 (People ex rel. Paving Co. v. Morgan, 61 App. Div. 373 , 70 N. Y. Supp. 516 ); but that the preparation of a street for the laying of the pavement and placing of the paving thereupon is not in any sense a process of manufacture within the meaning of said section. People ex rel. Syracuse Improvement Co. v. Morgan, 59 App. Div. 302 , 69 N. Y. Supp. 263 . The record does not disclose what portion, if any, of the relator’s plant is of a permanent nature, devoted to manufacturing, or what'portion, if any, of the cash accounts receivable or retained percentages are the proceeds of the sale of the product of such manufacturing. The relator has wholly failed to furnish us with any facts upon which to compute the amount of capital actually employed in this state in manufacturing and in the sale of the product of such manufacturing, and we cannot say that the comptroller has audited and stated the amount of capital actually employed in this state at too large an amount, even if the amount of capital exempt from the payment of a franchise tax were deducted.
The relator, on October 31, 1898, had been organized but eight
The determination of the comptroller should be modified by reducing the tax to $374.83, and, as so modified, confirmed, ■ without costs to either party. All concur.
Cases cited
- People ex rel. Syracuse Improvement Co. v. Morgan 59 App. Div. 302 p. 538
- People ex rel. Mutual Trust Co. v. Miller 177 N. Y. 51 at 69 p. 539
- People ex rel. Ft. George Realty Co. v. Miller 90 App. Div. 588 p. 539
- People ex rel. Hans Rees' Sons v. Miller 90 App. Div. 591 p. 539