BEFORE THE UTAH STATE TAX
COMMISSION
_____________________________________
XXXXX
Petitioner, : FINDINGS OF FACT,
: CONCLUSIONS
OF LAW,
v. : AND FINAL DECISION
:
COLLECTION
DIVISION OF THE : Appeal Nos. 92-0277 and 92-0278
UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION, : Account
Nos. XXXXX
Respondent. : & XXXXX
: Tax Type:
Property
_____________________________________
STATEMENT OF CASE
This
matter came before the Utah State Tax Commission for a formal hearing on
XXXXX. G. Blaine Davis, Administrative
Law Judge, heard the matter for and on behalf of the Commission. Present and representing the Respondent was
XXXXX, of the law firm XXXXX, together with XXXXX, Deputy Salt Lake County
Assessor. Petitioner failed to appear. The Formal hearing had previously been set
for XXXXX, and the Petitioner's representative called and indicated that he
would be out of town. However, he
failed to notify the representatives of Respondent, and one representative made
an appearance at the hearing because of lack of notification of the
continuance. The Respondent requested
the opportunity to place its evidence into the record, and to make its request,
which Motion was granted, and evidence was taken into the matter. Based upon the evidence and testimony
presented at the hearing, the Tax Commission hereby makes its:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The tax in question is property tax.
2. The period in question is the lien date of
XXXXX.
3. The property in question is an XXXXX which
was built in XXXXX and is in good condition.
It consists of two separate legal parcels of land, XXXXX which contains
all of the improvements, and parcel number XXXXX which is a parcel of vacant
land.
4. The values sustained for the property by the
Salt Lake County Board of Equalization were $$$$$ for parcel number XXXXX, and $$$$$
for parcel number XXXXX.
5. The Petitioner has requested a value of
$$$$$ for both parcels.
6. The Respondent presented a limited scope
appraisal on both properties, and arrived at a fair market value for both
properties of $$$$$, which the Respondent testified would be broken down as
$$$$$ for parcel number XXXXX, and $$$$$ for parcel number XXXXX. The testimony of value was uncontroverted
because of the non-appearance of Petitioner.
APPLICABLE LAW
The
Tax Commission is required to oversee the just administration of property taxes
to ensure that property is valued for tax purposes according to fair market
value. (Utah Code Ann. §59-1-210(7).)
Petitioner
has the burden of proof to establish that the market value of the subject
property is other than that as determined by Respondent. Respondent has the
burden of proof to show that the market value of the subject property is higher
than the value it sustained.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
The
Petitioner has failed to carry its burden of proof to establish the fair market
value of the subject property, and the Respondent has carried its burden to
prove that an increase in value is required
DECISION AND ORDER
Based
upon the foregoing, the Tax Commission finds that the market value of the
subject property as of XXXXX, for parcel number XXXXX is $$$$$ and the fair
market value for parcel number XXXXX is $$$$$.
The Salt Lake County Auditor is hereby ordered to adjust its records in
accordance with this decision. It is so
ordered.
DATED
this 11th day of August, 1994.
BY ORDER OF THE UTAH STATE TAX COMMISSION.
W. Val
Oveson Roger
O. Tew
Chairman Commissioner
ABSENT
Joe B.
Pacheco Alice
Shearer
Commissioner Commissioner