Case law

Yeshiva Kol Torah, Inc.,v Lakewood Township

New Jersey Tax Court · May 30, 2024

To qualify for an exemption from property tax: (1) the owner has to be organized for an exempt purpose; (2) the owner actually uses the property for an exempt purpose; and (3) the owner’s use and operation of the property … Summary judgment should be denied unless the right thereto appears so clearly as to leave no room for controversy. [Akhtar v. JDN Props.

International Schools Services Inc. v. West Windsor Township

24 N.J. Tax 453 · New Jersey Tax Court · Mar 27, 2009

Because ISS has the burden of establishing its entitlement to the exemption, Princeton University Press v. … Because his application of the facts to the statutory requirements was clearly shaped by his misunderstanding of the law, I give it no weight.

Punish and Indu Malhotra v. Director, Division of Taxation

New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 21, 2021

A scrivener’s error or clerical error is well established as a non-judgment-based error. See, Lockwood v. Walsh, 137 N.J. Eq. 445, 450 (Prerog. … Clearly, material mistakes drive deficiencies, but that does not mean that all material mistakes are misrepresentations.

BMC Software, Inc., Etc. v. Director, Division of Taxation

New Jersey Tax Court · May 26, 2017

The issue here is whether Subsidiary’s payments to Parent (1) qualify as intangible costs and expenses for purposes of N.J.S.A. 54:10A-4.4(b); and (2) if so, whether they qualify for an exception from the addback. … As non-exhaustive examples, the court noted circumstances likely to establish unreasonableness would be “unfair duplicative taxation; a technical failure to qualify the transactions under the statutory exceptions; an inability

Sam S. Russo v. Township of Plumsted

New Jersey Tax Court · Nov 9, 2022

Defendant further asserts the substantial disparity in income generated from the non-agricultural uses versus the income generated from the agricultural uses of the subject property clearly demonstrates that the non- agricultural … In light of the assertions made by plaintiff, disparity in income alone is insufficient to conclusively establish that the dominant use of the subject property is non-agricultural.

Town of Kearny v. PSE&G Services Corp.

New Jersey Tax Court · Feb 25, 2022

To determine if a law is special legislation, courts apply a three-part test established in Vreeland v. Byrne, 72 N.J. 292 (1977). … First, “a statute is presumed to be constitutional, and it will not be declared void unless the statute is clearly repugnant to the Constitution.” Ibid.

The United House of Prayer for All People of the Church on the Rock of the Apostolic Faith v. Camden City

New Jersey Tax Court · May 12, 2022

To establish a right to an exemption a petitioner must “satisfy the statutory three-part test that flows from N.J.S.A. 54:4-3.6. … Clearly the Bishop has no personal interest in any property of the plaintiff.

NJ State Firemen's Assn. v. Director, Div. of Taxs

New Jersey Tax Court · Jan 31, 2023

Since 1945, the Legislature has clearly required foreign carriers to directly pay the NJSFA 2% of all fire insurance premiums, the quid pro quo being a full credit against the payable IPT. … associations”); Office of the Governor, News Release, A. 3561/S. 2995 (Aug. 15, 1985) (S. 2995 was signed into law “to close a loophole in the State’s” IPT law “which had permitted” foreign entities “to avoid” the tax “by establishing

Vernon Township v. Kyungkon Choi

New Jersey Tax Court · Jul 10, 2025

The issue to be decided is whether the assessments on Lot 27 constitute the type of error that qualifies for relief under the Correction of Errors statute, N.J.S.A. 54:51A-7. … a minor subdivision expires: 190 days from the date on which the resolution of the municipal approval is adopted unless within such period a [conforming] plat . . . or deed clearly

Mayer & Schweitzer, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation

20 N.J. Tax 217 · New Jersey Tax Court · Sep 18, 2002

that its sales of securities by traders in New Jersey were sufficiently integrated with its business carried on in another state in accordance with the Director’s regulation, See N.J.A.C. 18:7-8.12; and (b) if they could establish … M & S would not be immune from taxation in those states by virtue of P.L. 86-272, which only protects vendors of tangible personal property from state income taxation for the mere solicitation of sales.

Hackensack Water Co. v. Borough of Haworth

1 N.J. Tax 73 · New Jersey Tax Court · Apr 1, 1980

. *79 As to the uplands, the basic value conclusions of the experts, both of whom were well qualified, hardly differed. … The testimony of its appraiser and engineer clearly demonstrated that the cost of reclaiming these lands would far exceed their market value.

New Jersey Natural Gas Co. v. Director, Division of Taxation

24 N.J. Tax 59 · New Jersey Tax Court · Apr 17, 2008

Ryan’s home office qualify as a regular place of business for New Jersey CBT purposes, but avoid that characterization for Connecticut tax purposes. For example, maintenance of Ms. … So that twenty years from now neither taxpayers, the Director, nor the courts need struggle with this issue, I urge the Legislature and the Director to modernize and more clearly state the qualifying facts which will allow

Borough of Roseland v. Essex County Board

18 N.J. Misc. 613 · New Jersey Tax Court · Oct 22, 1940

Had the second such reference, which qualifies the time, subsequent to which the reduction in assessment or valuation must have been made in order to be claimed for the current year, been intended to be limited to the one … The principle clearly implicit in this judgment is an endorsement by the board of the 1934 assessment figures.

General Motors Corp. v. City of Linden

20 N.J. Tax 242 · New Jersey Tax Court · Aug 26, 2002

Here, I must determine the allocation of the burden of proof in the context of a specific legislative scheme and clearly articulated legislative policy. … This Opinion assumes, without deciding, that the tanks in question did not qualify for exemption in 1986, 1987, and 1988.

Aish Hatorah New York, Inc. v. Passaic City

New Jersey Tax Court · Jul 11, 2019

The personal concerns of each 2 Aish is part of Aish HaTorah (“Aish Global”), “an international Orthodox Jewish outreach organization established in Jerusalem in 1974, with branches all over the world.” … The subject property are separately assessed and identified on Passaic’s municipal tax map as Block 3309, Lot 19, Qualifier C0001, and Qualifier C0002.

Eiszner v. Director, Division of Taxation

18 N.J. Tax 579 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jan 21, 2000

Such case law, however, is clearly not conclusive or binding on this court because there is no *589 indication that the Legislature intended to adopt federal tax concepts. Ibid. … The Court established the basic test which was codified in I.R.C. § 6501(e)(1)(A)(ii) and held the extended statute of limitations would apply where: [tjhe return on its face provides no clue to the existence of the omitted

Ciba Speciality Chemicals Corp v. Township of Dover

New Jersey Tax Court · Aug 4, 2017

Borough of Fort Lee, 7 N.J Tax 320, 335 (Tax 1985)(The “circumstances concerning the variance application clearly suggest the existence of a reasonable probability that the request would be granted . . . .”). … After hearing the testimony and evaluating the credibility of the witness, the court will make a determination with respect to whether he is qualified to offer the opinion contained in his report and addendum.

NBCP Urban Renewal Partnership v. City of Newark

17 N.J. Tax 59 · New Jersey Tax Court · Sep 30, 1997

Eventually, following a reformatting of the report and an upward adjustment for developer’s fees, a total project cost was established of $18,061,230 (which would result in an annual service charge of approximately $361,000 … Changes in the law subsequent to the execution of a contract are not binding on the parties unless the language of the agreement clearly indicates that the parties intended otherwise.

I-78 Logistics Park Lopatcong Urban Renewal, LLC v. Lopatcong Township

New Jersey Tax Court · Jul 23, 2021

In exchange for qualifying redevelopment and rehabilitation projects, the LTTEL affords municipalities the ability to grant local property tax exemptions to private entities. … Moreover, the First Amended Financial Agreement clearly delineates that the subject property’s land tax assessment is not based on the financial agreement, but rather will be determined by the assessor.

Sa v. Director

26 N.J. Tax 377 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 29, 2012

While the policy and purpose behind enacting I.R.C. § 104(a)(1) and N.J.S.A. 54A:6-6(a) are not clearly articulated or specified, 15 the New Jersey GIT exclusion for worker’s compensation payments is necessarily narrower … Sa would alternatively qualify for exclusion under that sub-section.