Case law

Brothers of Holy Cross, Inc. v. St. Joseph County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals

878 N.E.2d 548 · Indiana Tax Court · Dec 19, 2007

In order to meet that burden, the taxpayer must have submitted probative evidence, during the administrative hearing, sufficient to establish that its property qualifies for a tax exemption. 5 See id. at 907-08 (footnote … While BHC’s evidence clearly explains what services and activities were available to the Village’s residents in 2003-2005, the evidence lacks probative value with respect to the year at issue because it fails to establish

Idris v. Marion County Assessor

12 N.E.3d 331 · Indiana Tax Court · Jun 4, 2014

The Court will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board if it is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Finally, the Marion County Tax Reports and real estate listings upon which Kamenova relied not only overtly qualified their own accuracy but also indicated that only one of the three units was larger than Kamenova’s property

Meyer Waste System, Inc. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

741 N.E.2d 1 · Indiana Tax Court · Dec 7, 2000

Therefore, this Court holds that based upon established precedent, Meyer Waste owns the garbage that it hauls. B. … The facts clearly state that the stone was sold at Calcar’s Plant, not at the purchasers chosen delivery location.

Knox County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals v. Grandview Care, Inc.

826 N.E.2d 177 · Indiana Tax Court · Apr 29, 2005

will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board only if it is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Probative evidence is evidence sufficient to establish a given fact that, if not contradicted, will remain sufficient. Id. at n. 4.

Methodist Hospitals, Inc. v. Lake County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals

862 N.E.2d 335 · Indiana Tax Court · Jan 10, 2007

The question before this Court is whether Methodist made a prima facie case that the PCAs qualify for a charitable purposes exemption. … DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS On appeal, Methodist maintains that the Indiana Board clearly erred in determining that the PCAs did not qualify for a charitable purposes exemption as they “[provide] primary care services as part

6787 Steelworkers Hall, Inc. v. Scott

933 N.E.2d 591 · Indiana Tax Court · Sep 2, 2010

demonstrate to the Court that the Indiana Board's final determination is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Local 6787 claims that the Assessor's admission during the Indiana Board hearing, that Local 6787's organizational purposes and its uses of the banquet facility were both charitable and educational, clearly established Local

Jamestown Homes of Mishawaka, Inc. v. St. Joseph County Assessor

909 N.E.2d 1138 · Indiana Tax Court · Jul 24, 2009

Clearly, James town's provision of affordable housing to moderate and low-income individuals helps to alleviate this shortage and relieves [their] want of having a safe and clean place to live. … There is nothing in the record which indicates that any are welfare clients, or are permitted to occupy apartments without payment of the established rental.

Griffin v. Department of Local Government Finance

794 N.E.2d 1171 · Indiana Tax Court · Sep 9, 2003

The general purpose was to provide cost-free emergency medical care to indigent patients who did not qualify for Medicaid. … or immunities, which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens."

Emmis Publishing Corp. v. Indiana Department of State Revenue

612 N.E.2d 614 · Indiana Tax Court · Apr 8, 1993

"Clearly, the First Amendment does not prohibit all regulation of the press. … Clearly, the trial court determined that 'TV Facts' lacked essential ingredients in its form to constitute a newspaper under the statute.

IBEW Local 305 Inc. v. Allen County Assessor

Indiana Tax Court · Mar 13, 2026

These erroneous restrictions unnecessarily limit Indiana Code § 6-1.1-10-36.3, as educational establishments like the JATC can qualify as schools for purposes of subsection (c)(2). I. … When interpreting a statute, the Court must first “determine whether the legislature has spoken clearly and unambiguously on the point in question.”

Johnson Co. Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals and the Johnson Co. Assessor v. KC Propco LLC d/b/a Kindercare Learning Center

28 N.E.3d 370 · Indiana Tax Court · Apr 1, 2015

is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … Instead, it complains that KC Propco “only presented evidence of a confusing corporate structure of multiple entities that did not clearly establish who owned, occupied and used the property.” (Pet’rs’ Br. at 9.)

Pamela Slatten v. Hamilton County Assessor

Indiana Tax Court · Dec 29, 2023

must demonstrate to the Court that the Indiana Board’s final determination is arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege or immunity … Deadline for Recording under the “Homestead” Definition The homestead deduction applies to property that qualifies as a “homestead” for a particular assessment year.

Bartholomew County Assessor v. Housing Partnerships, Inc.

Indiana Tax Court · Aug 3, 2020

Accordingly, the Assessor contends that Housing Partnerships failed to present sufficient facts to establish that it qualified for a charitable purposes exemption, contending that the Indiana Board should have rejected … Tax Ct. 2017) (providing that the Tax Court will not reweigh the evidence unless the Indiana Board’s decision is clearly against the logic and effect of the facts and circumstances before it or it misapplies the law),

Fraternal Order of Eagles 3988, Inc. v. Morgan County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals

5 N.E.3d 1195 · Indiana Tax Court · Mar 18, 2014

will reverse a final determination of the Indiana Board only if it is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity … The Indiana Board also determined that Eagles did not establish that it qualified for the fraternal beneficiary association exemption under Indiana Code § 27-11-7-4. (See Cert. Admin. R. at 40.)

Hamilton County Assessor v. Charles E. Duke

69 N.E.3d 567 · Indiana Tax Court · Feb 3, 2017

Duke’s real property qualified for an educational purposes exemption, but did not qualify for a religious purposes exemption. … Accordingly, the Indiana Board’s finding of fact that Little Lamb provided activities that fostered an atmosphere of education cannot establish the property’s predominant use without a time-usage comparison.

Kildsig v. Warrick County Assessor

998 N.E.2d 764 · Indiana Tax Court · Oct 8, 2013

The Assessor, however, maintained that the classification of Kildsig's land was proper because, unlike his neighbor, he did not use his land for any qualifying agricultural purpose. … demonstrate to the Court that the Indiana Board's final determination is: (1) arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law; (2) contrary to constitutional right, power, privilege, or immunity

Whitelick Indiana Aerie 3702 Fraternal Order of Eagles, Inc. v. Hendricks County Property Tax Assessment Board of Appeals

82 N.E.3d 940 · Indiana Tax Court · Sep 1, 2017

Burden on Taxpayer to Establish Exempt Status. … Prior to the establishment of this court, in Fort Wayne Sport Club, Inc., the Court of Appeals held that, “the exemption is very clearly limited to such association as that term is defined in the 1935 act at § 181, [now,

LeSea Broadcasting Corp. v. State Board of Tax Commissioners

525 N.E.2d 637 · Indiana Tax Court · Jun 17, 1988

“It is well established that statutes exempting property from taxation are to be strictly construed in favor of the tax, and the burden is upon the one claiming the exemption to show that the property clearly falls within … Even if LeSea's property does not qualify for exemption under IC 6.1-1-10-21, it is not precluded from qualifying under IC 6-1.1-10-16 if it meets that statute’s qualifications.

McClain Museum, Inc. v. Madison County Assessor

Indiana Tax Court · Nov 7, 2019

(6) Establish a facility for display of vehicles and equipment. … The Museum argues on appeal that the Indiana Board clearly erred in its denial of the educational purposes exemption because military history “is both directly and indirectly related to subjects taught at our tax supported

Indianapolis Osteopathic Hospital, Inc. v. Department of Local Government Finance

818 N.E.2d 1009 · Indiana Tax Court · Dec 9, 2004

purposes exemption for the Healthples, the State Board has violated Article 1, § 283 of the Indiana - Constitution, - which provides: "The General Assembly shall not grant to any citizen, or class of citizens, privileges or immunities … Indiana Code § 6-1.1-10-16 clearly provides that the exemption applies only to that portion of the building that is "owned, occupied, and used" for charitable purposes.