Case Name: In the Matter of the Petition of HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF DURHAM for Administrative Review of Decision of Commissioner of Revenue Concerning Claim for Refund of Sales and Use Taxes for Period Beginning September 1, 1963, and Ending December 31, 1963
Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
Jurisdiction: North Carolina
Decision Date: 1965-11-24
Citations: 265 N.C. 719
Docket Number: 
Parties: In the Matter of the Petition of HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF DURHAM for Administrative Review of Decision of Commissioner of Revenue Concerning Claim for Refund of Sales and Use Taxes for Period Beginning September 1, 1963, and Ending December 31, 1963.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Carolina Reports
Volume: 265
Pages: 719–720

Head Matter:
In the Matter of the Petition of HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF DURHAM for Administrative Review of Decision of Commissioner of Revenue Concerning Claim for Refund of Sales and Use Taxes for Period Beginning September 1, 1963, and Ending December 31, 1963.
(Filed 24 November, 1965.)
Taxation § 29—
A judgment denying a bousing authority refund of sales taxes on articles purchased by it from retailers affirmed on authority of Sousing Authority v. Johnson, Commissioner of Bevenue, 261 N.C. 76.
Appeal by petitioner from Copeland, S.J., August 1965 Nonjury Civil Session of Waice.
This action was brought by petitioner, Housing Authority of the City of Durham, a public body organized pursuant to Chapter 157 of the General Statutes, for a refund of sales taxes which it had paid on purchases from retailers during the year 1963. Claim for refund was made according to the provisions of G.S. 105-266.1. The Commissioner of Revenue denied the claim and the Tax Review Board sustained his decision. G.S. 105-241.2. Petitioner then applied for judicial review by the Superior Court of Wake County as. provided by G.S. 105-241.3 and G.S. 143-306, et seq. From its judgment affirming the Tax Review Board, petitioner appeals to this Court.
Allen, Steed & Pullen; Edwards & Manson; McClelland & Barefoot for petitioner appellant.
Thomas Wade Bruton, Attorney General, and Charles D. Barham, Jr., Assistant Attorney General for respondent appellee.

Opinion:
Pee Cueiam.
The precise question presented by this appeal was decided adversely to petitioner in Housing Authority v. Johnson, Comr. of Revenue, 261 N.C. 76, 134 S.E. 2d 121. The judgment of the court below is
Affirmed.