Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1940 )

224 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN BonoMbl@ OOorge 8. Shbppard Comptroller of Pubtio &goounta AU8tiA, Texer Deer sir: QUO8tiOA, xhioh Vb a6 wo haw WFittbA lth rbteremb to the latter. Ymr the ettaohad 00rrr*bp0~4b~t~nferredto in your lbttbr, we quote the PoLlOrri~ t&at&al 6iWetiant "on Usreh 24, 19W, Mr. Eoy R. Vanderpool, ouAer of the Ideal 3aki~g COA~AA~ of Paris, Tex a rs, eINterthed strUOk8 aAd lq ulp mmlt of the bakery. The trUok8 u(Iperendereb at a value Of glOOO.00 aAd the eQuipmeAt At A value or $3300 .oo. Them Teluea wara viewed 8Ad ap- proud by the Commiaalo~er*a Court while ait- tlng 68 a b0ea 0r equidi8ati0n. *The rendition sheet was totalled but in totaIling the sheet and orror wm -do by oAe of the deputies of the TA‘ar Paaesaor-Colleator*a office. The total taxable taluatlon aboald~ bare been ~4300.00 and the total was ermronoua- ly atirn as $6300.00, an exoeaa value 0r @OOO.OO. This error was mado by tha Tax Assessor CW.lootor*a offi an8 the Ideal Baking Coaqwty was in 110ray at rwt. COASSqUSAtlf, thS tSX WU fiaUrS6 01). the value a8 was ahow~ totalled 011the ahert aAd the Tat ii011was made aooordfngly. Tha TaXIto- oelpta were tJrp.4 from the roll mid the Idral~ ooaparlagthe 1998 reoelpt r%ththA 19S9 tU tar receipt JBaueb to the bnkarl. ~VUtigatioA aa thS result of &la lnqulrp rerolled that we ha4 made the error in tot.SllAgtha IWAditiOllebASt.* The 0onteAtioa.and sir UMOAt of the tar 0riloi.d -in question hsre la oontained iA t%e tollow%ng quotatlan from hia brief: *i&WOtiOA #I--- 18 there A~jr 1Aw to the Oonptroller*s Dir100 fro81 (TAX Aaaeaaor-Collmtor*A ofrice Or Purls, Terra) to reiuud the amPat of th,e i3tateTat dqe~,thO 1d0el Baking colppaagrradtcrkeorsdlt for that amount on some oaront repoft? (Wo bare oat made our aoaual aettlernent whloh is to bS-m& treasury elther. taken sredlt mot errors that hare ooourred. I cop see AO QiHerenoe lo this oaae pad menp others that hme ocourred. mUiestlon i2--- u It is Aot possible to sake refuud its euaeated in the above quea- tiOA., chkt raoourae, otbrr thA aA aot 0r the legislature, does the Id881 Baking Coqwny hare in this ease.* This praoiao question baa boon herototore aAawored nnd oonoluelrely detemiaed by oglnloonaor this depertmnt. Vierefer to Opilrion or date tearoh25, 1937, by IiOAOrAble (F.K. %roedhuret, xseiatant Attorney General, and Opinlm SO. 0-lOUI both direoted to you, an& Opinion Ho. 04949 to Wonarable Mu-v in ii. Brown, ,Sr., criminal Diatrlet Attoz- Iley, Pt. Worth, Texas. we ~010~ copies or the last two opinlona referred to, which, together with the opinion rim mntioned, oopiea of wsi oh you have, ahauld ba rorwaroed to the tar oitlolal requetting the instent opinion. Although the above deaoribed opinlona eetebllah, la generaltunas, the proposition t&t t(UtOa,erronooualybut volrmterlly, either through ialatekeof law or faot, paid into the GeAeral Lund of the State Treasury,my Aot be n- tundod, w thin& that under the faot# iamlved en4 the lan- @Iage US& it wea our iAteAt to frondthat SUoh rlfti CodLd AOt be aooal~pllahad,dltbrr by diseet payment to tbr tax payer out of funds 1~ the Treasury, or, indlreotly, by your &uthorlziA&the Tax aureaaoa?-0olleotor,ia hia reports to the Bteta, to take ore&it for refuada lsndeby that oriiolal to the O~laiAinp, tax payer. . It ta a&&ted OA all aibea that 3t%ts ad ralorrm taxoa whloh have paaoed into thr proper fund of the atate Treasury aennot be refuAde4 bj ury offlslal to the tax payer; but an act or the Lep;lsleCurola rwd.rod to eonaummto this P=po-* But the palotie~4oherethat~o rundsorw3~ep are aonght to be taken out or the 8tate Treatwry far tax lu- rund purposes, but the Tex weraaor-Collaotor will memly make the rerun6 to the Ideal EUklsg Comppay of taxes UroAe- oualy pal&, end take ora&Ui for or daduot the amaunt of aaoh nfudl fronthis aubfwpmnt report aAd payment to the COW- troller, OIItmnuul aattlemAt for taxes subsequently eolfreted rr0inother p~aoaa a5U prtwartle8. ~0 o~nM&uuiao the proaedare ootlioed h&e for etfsot- lng thlr rerund to tho IBaul Baklrmg Company, would be tat&a- Honorable George H. &eppard, Page 4 prountta you and the Tax AoSenSor-OalleCtor of Lauka~' County ;3aringan approyrfotlonoontrary to the Constitutionand Statutes. It would be doing by indirection that whleh ad- mittedly aamot be done diraotly under the Conetltution. The Eroadhurst opinion and the other opinions of this de- partment, hereinabove referred to, forealoee thle purmtion, and, despite the raoognized hardohlp and apparent lxmqulty or the rule, when epplied to the Instant case, WY Poe1 tht the unquestioned law atated in them oplnfxm should not be departed fro=. iixoeptr0r Legialattve i4t, we know or no recourm this tax payer would have to reoouD hle lose. How- ever, we am not yuasing upon the conotitutionality of any suoh contaspltitedAct. Tours very truly ATTORHET GIIWKRALOF -AS ?mN:Rs APPROVEDAPR 1, 1940