*1 a tax reason of the ownership that to It added that may is to tax the property. of uniformity constitutional requirement
violates the on an is not imposed being property tax, that, ad rel. Department valorem basis: Commonwealth ex Justice v. A. Overholt & Co., Inc., A. District Tax Case, Lawrence supra. of A. E. Dick Company Contracting
No. of the court’s con- merely challenges one clusions of is dismissed. The decree of the court law, below is at the cost of School District of affirmed, Hazle Township. Company Unity Township
Jamison &Coal Coke Appellant. School District, *2 Argued C. before March 23,1949; Drew, Maxey, J., Reargued JJ. Stearne,' Patterson Stern, Linn, May C. J., before Pat- Linn, Stern, Maxey, JJ. and Jones, Stearne terson, him W. Pollins and E. with John Pollins, Galvin appellant. Pollins é for Pollins, & Robert W. him Jr., Smith, Horn, Best Smith, with appellee. Stambaugh, Special him T. Mc- E. F. with Counsel, Ghidsey, Attorney Keen General, for'Commonwealth, intervening appellee. Opinion Me. April Linn, 11, 1949: Justice Dis- the.defendant,
This is enjoining Unity Township, from a decree trict township collecting plaintiff tax “a pounds (10c) ton of on coal, 2,000. ten net. by,the and assessed a Eesolution of said levied .terms .of May upon adopted coal mined School District, 27,1948, plaintiff Unity from land and removed Town- ship The,.plaintiff.,is . . Coal and .” Jamison Coke Company, Pennsylvania corporation, owner and lessee engaged mining of coal its coal lands Town- passed, ship. The defendant resolu- enabling Act under the of June P. L. 25,1947, tion authority conferring 53 PS 2015.1. While tax, provided in section 1 “. . local Act, . such authori- authority by not ties shall of this act have virtue levy,-assess provide levying, and collect or for the assess- any privilege, collection on a ment transac- *3 personal subject, occupation or tion, which is subject or does now hereafter become to a State tax or . license . .” fee; township’s taxing pro- 1
Section of the resolution per (10c) “1. That a tax of ten vides, cents net ton of pounds (3c) on coal three 2,000 net ton and. pounds paid 2,000 of on to. be into the stone, General .hereby Funds of the District, and is im- School posed upon and all coal stone mined removed and/or ground Unity Township- transported from the in into Unity Township processing for on and after the first Monday July, provisions provide of . .-.” Other payment by “persons engaged for the tax of the in min- ing removing ground Unity and . . . coal in the Township . . .” for and the of collection the tax. plaintiff mining company
The filed its bill for injunction restraining, township collecting the ground power tax on the of lack of to this tax support position, in of and, its averred its bill that plaintiff, corporate capacity, “The in its liable for is 392 Pennsylvania: to the Commonwealth
and pays now annually levied and assessed A stock capital (a) of the Commonwealth Assembly the Act of under L. P. May 1947, 14, last amended Pennsylvania, tax under A income corporate 1871); (b) P.S. (72 Pennsyl- Commonwealth Assembly of the Act of L. 232 72 P.S. ( P. May 14, 1947, amended last vania, 3420-n).” and avers has been advised The plaintiff
“SIXTH: income tax, corporate tax and stock capital that on its are aforesaid, obliged pay it is under as a consequence, and, property, corporate L.P. supra, 1145, of the Act of June 25, 1947, provisions District payment for the it is not liable terms under the District said School of the tax levied May (Exhibit ‘A’), adopted 27, resolution of its the School and assessed tax so levied and that plaintiff this mined and removed the coal District on coal lands situate from its township respon The filed and void.”
wholly illegal
argument
court
banc heard
The
sive answer.
enjoining
entered a decree
and answer
bill
bill.
prayer
in accord with
township
It is
makes three
points.
this
It
too
no
jurisdiction.
that
equity
contended
first
enjoin taxa
will
argument
equity
settled
well
Trus
tax: compare Dougherty,
power
tion for want
393
et
317 Pa.
et 330 Pa. A. 889 and Phila. v. (1938) Sam- al., 312, 198 Pa. 12 A. 2d 338 79 321, (1910) which involved uels, the Dunkard just Twp. transactions Tax 359 Pa. 60 2dA. 39 Case, 605, (1918) involved tax on mining method. stripping Those clear were cases or oc- transactions privileges, cupations therefore distinguished of “a Unity tax ... on all coal mined . .” . Appellant cites Pittsburgh, McClelland 2dA. 118, (1918) with the suggestion it ig- nores the Statutory Construction Act of May 1937, 28, L. P. section 16 PS 1019, 58, reject we must the Act “. suggestion; provides that . . All provisions of a law classes hereafter enumerated shall be * strictly construed: . . . (3) Provisions imposing taxes
... .” The third point suggested by does not appellant arise record and this therefore need not be considered. Decree to be affirmed; costs paid by appellant.
Dissenting Opinion Me. Justice Hoeace Steen: For the reasons I expressed my dissenting opinion the case of Lawrence Township School District T ax Case, Pa. 67 A. 2d I must dissent the present case In also. fact the decision here seems to me even more untenable than in the Lawrence Township instead of case, because, leaving their intention to be from the wording inferred of their the School resolution, Board of the Town ship ewpressly set forth what their inten tion and it was, intention of the legislative body under all the which, authorities, factor controlling in determining the nature the tax. The clause enacting of the resolution is here preceded by “WHEREAS” *5 it of are as follows: “WHEREAS, two which
clauses, of the Board that certain per- come to the attention and or the mining are income obtaining profit sons or removal or on of which coal stone coal stone most of it no taxes ever been has been paid, have considered Board of Directors the unmineable; and, WHEREAS, of that the tax burden for the is the a of opinion portion of the be borne the operation School District should and the the removal persons deriving mining benefit of or into coal or transported stone within township, etc. THEREFORE,” processing, NOW, The resolution itself is provides paid only by persons engaged mining coal,—not it. by persons owning possessing to me the fallacy major- What seems obvious it itself ity solely bases opinion words: “That a tax of ten net ton of (10(i) 2,000 it pounds on coal ... be and hereby imposed upon all coal . . . all the other etc.; wholly ignores mined,” resolution as well as state- language express and ment of intent of the Board hereinbefore quoted any possibility was evidently designed prevent court is as the a construction resolution such clearly it. To mind this placing my now upon and I therefore not would excise tax, of the Court of Common Pleas of reverse the decree County. Westmoreland
Supplemental Opinion Reakgument Opinion Mr. Justice June Linn, 24,1949: At the informed that reargument appel- we were from unincorporated lant district has collected school in the sum of “is $10,287.89 operators of these taxes are, wit, uncertain the status what school would be appellant whether or not district] [the to the taxpayers. these taxes Even now liable to refund now your [appellant] some have taxpayers requested for refunds.”
We are convinced phraseology resolution that the intention of the levying school dis trict was to tax all operators whether un corporate or *6 incorporated and that it would not have passed resolution if it had understood at the time that on the corporate activity was its beyond com power: pare Kelley Kalodner, 180, 186, 188, A. 598 (1935). resolution is therefore invalid as to the unincorporated operators.
Our previous affirmance of the order of the court below is reaffirmed.
Hampton Township School District Tax Case.