117 N.E.2d 15
No. 33309Supreme Court of Ohio.
Decided January 27, 1954.
Taxation — Tangible personal property used in business — Asphalt plants of road contractor — Valuation — Annual depreciation rate — Evidence insufficient to prove rate used unreasonable or unlawful.
APPEAL from the Board of Tax Appeals.
This controversy, here on appeal from a decision of the Board of Tax Appeals, involves certain deficiency assessment orders issued by the Tax Commissioner and resulting from increased valuations of tangible personal property belonging to appellant.
In the appeal to the Board of Tax Appeals, all issues were settled by stipulation except the rate of depreciation to be applied in determining the true value in money of appellant’s asphalt plants.
In determining valuation, the Tax Commissioner allowed an annual depreciation rate of two and one-half per cent for the year of acquisition, five per cent for each year thereafter until the value reached thirty per cent of cost, and two and one-half per cent for each year thereafter until the value reached twenty per cent of cost, after which no further depreciation was allowed. Appellant contends that such depreciation rate is insufficient and produces a value of more than the true value in money.
Mr. Robert Dow Hamilton, for appellant.
Mr. C. William O’Neill, attorney general, and Mr. W.E. Herron, for appellee.
Per Curiam.
Appellant has produced no evidence of the present actual true value in money of the
Page 504
asphalt plants in question, but attacks the formula used by the commissioner. Considering the dates of acquisition of the plants, expenditures made thereon since acquisition, the number of years they have been in use and the expected remaining life of the plants as disclosed by the evidence, this court is of the opinion that the evidence fails to show that the result reached by the Board of Tax Appeals is unreasonable or unlawful.
The decision is affirmed.
Decision affirmed.
WEYGANDT, C.J., MIDDLETON, HART, ZIMMERMAN and LAMNECK, JJ., concur.