GULFSTREAM PARK RACING ASSOCIATION, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Gulfstream Park Racing Association's tax assessment challenge was timely filed with the Division of Administrative Hearings on day 57, even though the Department of Revenue's notice was ambiguous about the proper filing location, and the petition was transferred after the 60-day deadline expired.
A taxpayer's petition filed with the Division of Administrative Hearings on the 57th day is timely when the Department of Revenue's notice of reconsideration ambiguously fails to clearly specify that filing must occur with the Department of Revenue rather than the Division.
[1] An ambiguous notice of reconsideration that fails to clearly specify the proper filing location permits a taxpayer to reasonably file a petition with the Division of Admi…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGulfstream Park Racing Association received a tax assessment from the Department of Revenue. The Notice of Reconsideration did not clearly specify whe…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Challenge To Tax Assessment cases and more on FLexlaw
JORGENSON, Associate Judge.
In this case, the appellant, Gulfstream Park Racing Association, raised the issue of whether its challenge to the validity of a tax assessment against the appellant by the Department of Revenue was timely initiated under sections 120.575 and 72.011(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1992). The statutes and department rules provide for a 60-day jurisdictional filing period, and require filing with the Department of Revenue within that 60 days. On the 57th day, the appellant here filed its petition with the Division of Administrative Hearings. By the time the Division of Administrative Hearings transferred the appellant’s petition to the Department of Revenue, the 60-day filing period had expired.
We find that the Notice of Reconsideration did not clearly inform the appellant of the proper place in which to file its petition to initiate a challenge to the tax assessment, and that the appellant could have interpreted the letter as permitting filing with the Division of Administrative Hearings rather than the Department of Revenue. We, therefore, hold that the appellant met the filing requirement by filing with the Division of Administrative Hearings on the 57th day.
We reverse the final order of the Department of Revenue which denied appellant’s request for an administrative hearing, and remand with directions to accept the petition as timely filed.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
BARFIELD and BENTON, JJ., concur.