Preview:

****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecticut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Connecticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be reproduced and distributed without the express written permission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** OXFORD TIRE SUPPLY, INC. v. COMMISSIONER OF REVENUE SERVICES (SC 16087)
Borden, Norcott, Palmer, Sullivan and Callahan, Js.* Argued November 2, 1999--officially released July 18, 2000

Jonathon L. Ensign, assistant attorney general, with whom, on the brief, was Richard Blumenthal, attorney general, for the appellant (defendant). Douglas R. Steinmetz, with whom were Michael J. Hinton and, on the brief, Heather V. Taylor, for the appellee (plaintiff). Richard Blumenthal, attorney general, and Kimberly P. Massicotte and Mark P. Kindall, assistant attorneys general, filed a brief for the commissioner of environmental protection as amicus curiae. Richard Blumenthal, attorney general, and Mark F. Kohler, assistant attorney general, filed a brief for the Connecticut siting council as amicus curiae.
Opinion

PALMER, J. This appeal requires us to decide whether the trial court properly concluded that scrap tire

removal services are exempt from state sales and use taxes. We conclude that those services are subject to sales and use taxes1 and, therefore, we reverse the judgments of the trial court. The relevant facts and procedural history are undisputed. At all times relevant to this appeal, the plaintiff, Oxford Tire Supply, Inc. (Oxford), was engaged in the business of removing used automobile tires from the premises of various commercial enterprises, including tire dealers and gas stations. Oxford removed the scrap tires for a fee and transported them to its facility in Plainfield, where they were sorted. Oxford thereafter delivered the tires to Exeter Energy (Exeter), a tire burning plant located in Sterling.2 Oxford's smaller customers typically stored scrap tires on their business premises pending their removal. Oxford's larger customers generally warehoused their scrap tires in trailers that Oxford had provided to them. Oxford served numerous customers throughout Connecticut and removed millions of scrap tires annually. During the two audit periods that are the subject of this appeal, January 1, 1989, through December 31, 1991, and January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1994, Oxford did not charge or collect sales taxes from its customers for its tire removal services. In November, 1993, the defendant, the commissioner of revenue services (commissioner), assessed sales taxes against Oxford pursuant to General Statutes (Rev. to 1993)

Download Oxford Tire Supply, Inc. v. Commissioner of Revenue Services.pdf

Connecticut Law