85-0529 - Sales

BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

_____________________________________

UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION

COLLECTION DIVISION,                                        :

                                                                                    )

Petitioner,                                                                                 :           Decision From

                                                                                    )           Informal Hearing

v.                                                                                 :           To Revoke Sales Tax

                                                                                    )           License

XXXXX                                                                                  :

DBA XXXXX,                                                            )           Appeal No. 85-0529

                                                                                    :           Sales Tax Lic. XXXXX

            Respondent.                                                     )

_____________________________________

STATEMENT OF CASE

            Application has been made by the Utah State Tax Commission, Collection Division for the revocation of the Sales Tax License No. XXXXX.  An Informal Hearing was scheduled to be held on XXXXX.  The Respondent did not appear at the hearing.  XXXXX and XXXXX appeared for in behalf of the Collection Division of the Tax Commission.

            The Collection Division presented a summary of collection attempts of the outstanding sales tax liability.

DECISION AND ORDER

            Based upon the evidence presented at the Informal Hearing, it is the Decision and Order of the Utah State Tax Commission that Sales Tax License No. XXXXX be hereby revoked.

            It is the further order of the Tax Commission that a representative of the Commission serve this Decision and Order upon the Respondent and thereupon seize the Sales Tax License No. XXXXX.

            If the License is not in the possession of the Respondent, the Respondent is ordered to deliver it to the Utah State Tax Commission within 24 hours from the date of the service of this Order.

            The Respondent is hereby ordered to close the doors of his business.  Failure to do so may result in criminal prosecution.

            The Respondent may request in writing within three (3) working days from receipt of this Decision, that the Commission stay the execution of this Order for thirty (30) days providing the Respondent is able to prove the following conditions have been met:

            1.  A bond has been posted in the amount of the tax, penalty and interest that is due.  The bond must be in the form a cashiers check, certificate of deposit, surety bond or cash.

            2.  Proof that an account has been opened at a local financial institution by the end of the first banking day following the receipt of this Decision.  The account must name the Respondent's company and the Utah State Tax Commission as co-owners.  In addition, the Respondent must make weekly deposits into the account in the amount of the current accruing sales tax liability.

            It is the further order of the Utah State Tax Commission that the foregoing order take full force and effect from the date hereof, unless the Respondent shows good cause within 10 days in writing for his failure to appear at the regularly scheduled hearing on this matter.

            DATED this 20 day of January, 1986.

BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.

Mark K. Buchi                                                             Joe Pacheco *

Chairman                                                                      Commissioner

R. H. Hansen                                                                Roger O. Tew

Commissioner                                                               Commissioner

* Since the hearing on this case, Commissioner Gary C. Cornia has been replaced by Commissioner Joe B. Pacheco.  Commissioner Pacheco has been duly advised of the facts and circumstances regarding this case and is qualified to sign this decision.