Attorney For PETITIONER: Attorney For RESPONDENT: TIMOTHY D. HERNLY STEVE CARTER RICHARD J. DEAHL Attorney General Away from INDIANA BARNES & THORNBURG Indianapolis, Within the Southern area Fold, From inside the LINDA We. VILLEGAS DEPUTY Lawyer Standard Indianapolis, Within the ______________________________________________________________________ From the INDIANA Taxation Courtroom This new Regal Star Casino, LLC, ) ) Petitioner, ) ) v. ) ) Result in Zero. 71T10-0305-TA-24 BOOKER BLUMENBURG, JR., ) TOWNSHIP ASSESSOR Regarding CALUMET ) TOWNSHIP, River Condition, INDIANA, ) ) Respondent. ) ______________________________________________________________________
Items And Procedural Background Majestic Star is actually an enthusiastic Indiana limited-liability organization you to definitely operates a gambling establishment riverboat – brand new Regal Star II – into Lake Michigan. Brand new Majestic Celebrity II, launched in October, 1997, is harbored within Buffington Harbor within the Gary, Indiana. The Regal Superstar II shares an excellent docking pavilion having another riverboat, new Trump Local casino. Since Regal Star II was being oriented, Majestic Star rented a smaller riverboat out-of a 3rd-group to make use of with its operation. Get a hold of footnote Which quicker riverboat, the fresh new Regal Star I, is actually produced in 1972 along with a certified holding capacity from 1,900 some one. Before its use by Regal Celebrity, the latest riverboat ended up being made use of while the a supper sail boat when you look at the Pennsylvania; accordingly, Majestic Celebrity needed to make some adjustment into the riverboat from inside the order to transform it to be used “as an excellent stopgap while you are [the newest Regal Celebrity II] is actually lower than framework.” (Pet’r Br. on 5.) Way more specifically, in early 1996 Regal Star added navigational products, increased new vessel’s electric ability (to manage brand new operation out of playing hosts), and you can strung carpet. Majestic Star operate the fresh Majestic Star We of June of 1996 using Oct away from 1997. For the March step one, 1997 research go out, this new Calumet Township Assessor (Assessor) tasked the new Majestic Celebrity I an examined value of $5,143,490. Convinced that value to be way too high, Majestic Star appealed the research with the River County Possessions Income tax Review Board away from Appeals (PTABOA). Immediately after performing a listening for the amount, the newest PTABOA quicker Regal Star’s evaluation to help you $step 3,271,340.See footnote Still thinking brand new comparison to be too much, Regal Superstar punctual submitted a Petition for Report on Assessment (Setting 131) into State Panel regarding Income tax Commissioners (County Board). Once carrying out an administrative hearing with the , the new Indiana Board then issued a final commitment doubting Regal Star’s ask for relief.Discover footnote Toward , Majestic Celebrity started a distinctive income tax interest. Brand new activities subsequently accessible to argue the outcome in accordance with the management number as well as on its briefs. Properly, the brand new Courtroom read the brand new parties’ dental arguments towards . Extra circumstances could well be given once the necessary. Data And Thoughts Degree of Comment This Courtroom gets great deference to help you last determinations of one’s Indiana Board. Wittenberg Lutheran Vill. Endowment Corp. v. Lake Condition Prop. Tax Comparison Bd. out-of Is attractive, 782 Letter.E.2d 483, 486 (Ind. Income tax Ct. 2003), review refuted. Therefore, the newest Court tend to reverse a last commitment of one’s Indiana Board only if it’s: (1) arbitrary, capricious, a discipline from discretion, or perhaps not relative to law;
(4) instead observation regarding processes required by legislation; or (5) unsupported because of the generous otherwise legitimate proof. Ind. Code Ann. § 33-26-6-6(e)(1)-(5) (West Supp. 2004). The fresh cluster trying to overturn the Indiana Board’s finally commitment contains the responsibility from exhibiting the invalidity. Osolo Township Assessor v. Elkhart Maple Lane Assocs., L.P., 789 Letter.Age.2d 109, 111 (Ind. Taxation Ct. 2003). Dialogue Regal Star has actually increased multiple issues for that it Court’s remark. Each of people activities would be treated subsequently.