151 Ga. 216 | Ga. | 1921
The exception is to a judgment refusing an interlocutory injunction against the sheriff of Chatham County, to prevent the levy and sale of plaintiff’s property under a tax execution issued by the comptroller-general of the State, for State and county taxes on plaintiff’s property located in this State, payable in the year 1919. The plaintiff, on April 19, 1919, made a return to the receiver of tax returns of the County of Chatham for the year in question, showing its property and values as follows:
“Ossabaw Island, 22,000 acres of land,............$150,000
Shipbuilding plant on leased land,.............. 50,000
Moneys in bank.............................. 125,000
Office furniture, .............................. 500 ”
The return was rejected by the receiver of tax returns, at the instance of the comptroller-general, who contended that the law required it to be made to him. Upon refusal of. the plaintiff to make returns to the comptroller-general he proceeded to assess the property. The assessment was as follows: ■
“Real Estate located in Chatham County, known as
Ossabaw Island ........'....................$220,000
Shipbuilding plant............................ 50,000
Money, notes and accounts ..................... 125,000
Office furniture, fixtures, etc................... 500”
The plaintiff having declined to pay the tax on such assessment, the comptroller-general issued an execution on the basis of his assessment. The plaintiff contended that the property was not returnable to the comptroller-general; and that, he being without jurisdiction, the execution issued by him was void and should be enjoined from enforcement against its property. The case is therefore reduced to the single question of power of the comptroller-general over tangible property of plaintiff located in this State, for the purpose of levying and collecting taxes. Such power is' asserted by the comptroller-general on the ground that the plaintiff is a navigation company, and as such is required to make returns of its tangible property located in this State to him, in virtue of section 8 of the general tax act of 1918 (Acts 1918, pp 43-83), which, in so far as is material to the question at issue, provides: “ That all railroad companies . . equipment and navigation companies, through their president, general manager, or agents having control of the companies’ affairs in this State, shall be required to make re
The petition, which was introduced as evidence, alleged, among other things: “ That petitioner has never owned a ship or vessel of any kind or character; has never at any time engaged in the business of a navigation company; that there is no immediate prospect of petitioner ever doing so, and that petitioner may never in point of fact engage in the business. It will, in any event, not do so during the year 1919. The only business that petitioner has in point of .fact done in Georgia has been the construction of some tugs for the Dnited States Government, under a contract taken over by the petitioner. Petitioner’s New York office has entered into some charter-parties and freight contracts for petitioner.” Keferring to the charter-parties thus spoken of in the petition, one of the witnesses for the plaintiff testified that they “ were the ordinary
While some of the evidence as to the character of the business carried on by the plaintiff was in the nature of conclusions, there was no conflict of evidence as to any of the matters stated above. The question is, was the judge authorized, under the facts as indicated, to hold as he did that the Southland Steamship Company of Delaware was a navigation company, within the meaning of the statutes of this State, and required as such to malee returns to the comptroller-general ?’
It is provided in the Civil Code, § 2565: “ All corporate powers and privileges,,to navigation companies in this State shall be issued and granted by the Secretary of State, . . ” In § 2566 it is provided that in the petition for incorporation there “ shall be stated the names and residences of each of the persons desiring to form said corporation, the name of the navigation company they desire to have incorporated, the amount of the proposed capital stock, the number of years it is to continue, the place where its principal office is to be located, a request to be incorporated under the laws of this State,” etc. In § 2567 the form of the certificate of incorporation is prescribed, which declares that the incorporators may exercise the powers and privileges of a corporation: “ for the purpose of owning, constructing, equipping, maintaining, and operating vessels,
The trial judge was authorized to hold that the plaintiff was a navigation company, within the meaning of the statute;, and there was no error in refusing an injunction.
Judgment affirmed.