Cited by

Opinions in Arizona that cite Crane Co. v. Arizona State Tax Commission, 163 P.2d 656.

60 citing documents.

First Nat. Ben. Soc. v. Sisk 173 P.2d 101 Ariz. 1946
First Nat. Ben. Soc. v. Sisk 173 P.2d 101 Ariz. 1946
The . , , wherein it was stated: “This court has never held that insofar as a tax was concerned, the state may be estopped from the collection of a legal tax by reason of the action.of any of its officers.
Pratt-Gilbert Hardware Co. v. O'Neil 173 P.2d 91 Ariz. 1946
Pratt-Gilbert Hardware Co. v. O'Neil 173 P.2d 91 Ariz. 1946
we said: “Under the agreed facts, the sales were made in Arizona and are, therefore, taxable.
Garvey v. Trew 170 P.2d 845 Ariz. 1946
Garvey v. Trew 170 P.2d 845 Ariz. 1946
* * * “For the foregoing reasons, reluctant as we are to depart from the rule of stare de-cisis, we think this is one of the cases which require such a procedure * * Again, , , we said: “We, therefore, face the present inquiry with a ruling of this court that contractors are not ultimate consumers and that the *351 purchase and placement of tangible personal property in structures by contractors, under contracts for others, constitute a resale of such property.
Hunt v. Superior Court Ex Rel. Navajo County 170 P.2d 293 Ariz. 1946
Hunt v. Superior Court Ex Rel. Navajo County 170 P.2d 293 Ariz. 1946
we reviewed all prior cases construing this statute, and held, in effect, that notwithstanding its provisions, after hearing an injunction might issue if it appeared that the board was acting illegally or in excess of its powers.
Evans v. Hallas 167 P.2d 94 Ariz. 1946
Evans v. Hallas 167 P.2d 94 Ariz. 1946
we called attention to the fact that unless a tax has been imposed by law, the provisions of sec.