Case Title: Boswell v. Abex Corporation

Citation: 317 So. 2d 317

Docket Number: 

State: alabama

Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Date: 1975-07-17T00:00:00Z

Document:
317 So. 2d 317 (1975)
In re Charles A. BOSWELL, etc.
v.
ABEX CORPORATION, a corp.
Ex parte Charles A. Boswell, as Commissioner of Revenue of The State of Alabama.
SC 1345.

Supreme Court of Alabama.
July 17, 1975.
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., Willard W. Livingston, Counsel, Dept. of Revenue, and Asst. Atty. Gen., B. Frank Loeb, Asst. Counsel, Dept. of Revenue, and Asst. Atty. Gen., for petitioner.
Steiner, Crum & Baker and M. R. Nachman, Jr., Montgomery, opposed.
*318 MERRILL, Justice.
Petition of Charles A. Boswell for certiorari to the Court of Civil Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that court in Boswell, as Commissioner of Revenue of the State of Alabama v. Abex Corporation, 55 Ala.App. 477, 317 So. 2d 314.
Writ denied.
The Circuit Court of Montgomery County issued an alternative writ of mandamus to the Commissioner of Revenue ordering the Commissioner to refund $8,562.00 to the taxpayer. The Commissioner appealed and the Court of Civil Appeals affirmed.
In denying the writ in this case, we do not approve a statement made in the trial court's opinion and adopted by the Court of Civil Appeals. The statement reads:
In Southern Electric Generating Co., supra, the administrative construction had been the same for 25 years and in Haden, supra, for 22 years. This court approved the following in Hamm, supra:
The correct rule is that an administrative interpretation of the governmental department for a number of years is entitled to favorable consideration by the courts; but this rule of construction is to be laid aside where it seems reasonably certain that the administrator's interpretation has been erroneous and that a different construction is required by the language of the statute. State v. Wertheimer Bag Co., 253 Ala. 124, 43 So. 2d 824; Drennan Motor Co. v. State, 279 Ala. 383, 185 So. 2d 405; East Brewton Materials, Inc. v. State Department of Revenue, 45 Ala.App. 584, 233 So. 2d 751.
*319 Taxpayers have no vested right to rely upon an erroneous interpretation of the statute exempting them from taxation, and under Section 100 of the Constitution of Alabama of 1901, the taxing authority has no discretion in a matter of this kind. The reason for this rule is that in the assessment and collection of taxes, the State is acting in its governmental capacity and it cannot be estopped with reference to the enforcement of taxes, even when the taxpayer was advised that it was not responsible for a tax. Were this not the rule the taxing officials could waive most of the State's revenue. State v. Maddox Tractor & Equipment Co., 260 Ala. 136, 69 So. 2d 426; Crutcher Dental Supply Co. v. Rabren, 286 Ala. 686, 246 So. 2d 415.
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is correctly bottomed on the opinion in State v. United States Steel Corp., 281 Ala. 553, 206 So. 2d 358.
Opinion corrected and writ denied.
HEFLIN, C. J., and MADDOX, JONES and SHORES, JJ., concur.