In the recently released case of J.C. Penny Corporation v. Town of Manchester the Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed the trial court’s decision denying J.C. Penny’s appeal of it’s personal property assessment, finding that J.C. Penny failed to meet the burden of proof that it had been aggrieved by the assessor’s actions. 

J.C. Penny filed an amended declaration of it’s personal property assets along with a statement indicating that the declaration contained a large amount o ghost assets and that they reserved the right to appeal the assessment after a physical inventory was completed. The assessor then established the assessment according to the filed declaration. J.C. Penny appealed the assessment administratively, to Superior Court and then to the Appellate Court. 

The Appellate Court’s decision states: 

“The critical document in the present case is the plaintiff’s amended declaration, filed with the assessor on December 5, 2005. There are, in effect, two ways in which to characterize the plaintiff’s amended declaration: (1) as a complete filing of all of its personal property for the given tax year; or (2) as an incomplete filing. In either respect, the plaintiff has failed to meet its initial burden of demonstrating that it has been aggrieved by the actions of the town assessor.” 

The decision then goes on to indicate that it is a taxpayer’s obligation to file a timely, complete and accurate declaration. If the taxpayer fails to do so then the assessor is entitled to rely upon the best available information in valuing the property. Therefore, by seeking a reduction after filing the amended declaration the taxpayer was essentially requesting a “do-over”, which is not permitted by law. 

I would be interested to hear your take on this case.