Title: State Ex Rel. Indiana Dept. of Revenue v. MARION CC

State: indiana

Issuer: Indiana Supreme Court

Document:

255 Ind. 501 (1970)
265 N.E.2d 241
STATE EX REL. INDIANA DEPT. OF REVENUE
v.
MARION CIRCUIT COURT.
No. 969S219.

Supreme Court of Indiana.
Filed December 31, 1970.
Theodore L. Sendak, Attorney General, Hugh R. Couch, Deputy Attorney General, John T. Carmody, Deputy Attorney General, for petitioner.
Patrick R. Taylor, of Martinsville, for respondent.
No petition for rehearing filed.
*502 DEBRULER, J.
This is an original action brought by petitioner for Writ of Prohibition against respondent court. This Court has previously issued a temporary Writ of Prohibition directing the respondent trial court to refrain from proceeding further or exercising jurisdiction in any and all matters pertaining to this cause of action. The Writ of Prohibition is hereby made permanent.
The plaintiff in the trial court, Speedway Auto Laundry, Inc., filed a complaint praying the respondent court to enjoin the petitioner from collecting certain corporate income taxes assessed against the plaintiff. The respondent court issued a temporary restraining order pending an evidentiary hearing and subsequent to that hearing issued a temporary injunction enjoining the petitioner from attempting to collect the additional taxes from the plaintiff, Speedway Auto Laundry, Inc. The respondent court overruled petitioner's Motion to Reconsider the Verified Motion to Dismiss and petitioner was granted relief in this Court by the aforementioned temporary Writ of Prohibition which is now made permanent.
The issue before this Court is whether the respondent court has subject matter jurisdiction in this cause of action.
The plaintiff, Speedway Auto Laundry, Inc., relies on the case of Department of Treasury v. Ridgely, et al. (1936), 211 Ind. 9, 4 N.E.2d 557, to invoke the jurisdiction of the respondent court. In that case the plaintiff taxpayer sought and obtained an injunction to restrain the State from attempting to collect certain gross income taxes. On appeal, while reversing on other grounds, this Court upheld the granting of the remedy:
It is clear that the remedy thus provided by the Legislature is and is intended to be the sole and exclusive remedy available to question the legality of the imposition of a tax under the Indiana Gross Income Tax Law.
We hold, therefore, that the respondent court is without subject matter jurisdiction to enjoin or restrain the petitioner from attempting to collect the taxes in question from the plaintiff.
It is therefore, considered, ordered, adjudged and decreed the respondents be and they are hereby commanded and directed to permanently refrain from proceeding further or *505 exercising jurisdiction in any and all matters pertaining to the cause of Speedway Auto Laundry, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue and James O. Mathis, Commissioner, being Cause No. C 69-920 in the Circuit Court of Marion County, State of Indiana.
Hunter, C.J., Arterburn, Givan and Jackson, JJ., concur.
NOTE.  Reported in 265 N.E.2d 241.