Preview:

Certiorari Denied, No. 31,424, January 20, 2009
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO Opinion Number: 2009-NMCA-019 Filing Date: October 30, 2008 Docket No. 27,734 KINDER MORGAN CO2 COMPANY, L.P.,

Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. STATE OF NEW MEXICO TAXATION AND REVENUE DEPARTMENT, Defendant-Appellant.

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF SANTA FE COUNTY Carol J. Vigil and Daniel A. Sanchez, District Judges
Hinkle, Hensley, Shanor & Martin, L.L.P. Andrew J. Cloutier Joel M. Carson, III Roswell, NM
for Appellee
Gary K. King, Attorney General Carolyn A. Wolf, Special Assistant Attorney General Santa Fe, NM
for Appellant

OPINION SUTIN, Chief Judge.
{1} In this appeal involving severance taxes, we address the concept of excusable neglect in a Rule 1-060(B)(1) NMRA proceeding where an attorney is careless in failing to meet a deadline. We are also required to interpret a regulation of the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department (the Department) that allows a purchaser of an interest in a pipeline to deduct transportation costs from the price of the product sold.  We hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding excusable neglect under the circumstances.  We also hold that the district court erred in its interpretation of the regulation and in determining that the taxpayer was entitled to a refund of severance taxes assessed and paid.

BACKGROUND
{2} The Bravo Dome Pipeline (the pipeline) was constructed prior to 1985 to transport compressed carbon dioxide from the production unit to the oil fields where it is injected into reservoirs to enhance oil production. Sun Oil Company (Sun), one of several original constructors of the pipeline, made a capital investment of approximately $7.9 million in the construction of the pipeline.
{3} In 1991 the Department adopted regulations allowing taxpayers to deduct the cost of transportation from the price of products sold away from the production unit.  The regulation at issue states, in part:
[a]llowable transportation costs are . . . depreciation expense, which includes depreciation on the pipeline or gathering system and associated equipment determined on the straight-line method based on the class life of the pipeline or gathering system and equipment and an appropriate salvage value for equipment.  A successor in business or purchaser of assets shall base depreciation expense for the purposes of Section 3.18.6.9 NMAC upon the depreciation schedules of the previous owner[.]
3 NMAC 18.6.9(H)(4) (1991, as amended through 2000).  Prior to the adoption of this regulation, the only transportation deduction allowed was the

Download 09ca-019.pdf

New Mexico Law