State Codes and Statutes

Statutes > Connecticut > Title12 > Chap203 > Sec12-117a

      Sec. 12-117a. Appeals from boards of tax review or boards of assessment appeals. Any person, including any lessee of real property whose lease has been recorded as provided in section 47-19 and who is bound under the terms of his lease to pay real property taxes, claiming to be aggrieved by the action of the board of tax review or the board of assessment appeals, as the case may be, in any town or city may, within two months from the date of the mailing of notice of such action, make application, in the nature of an appeal therefrom, with respect to the assessment list for the assessment year commencing October 1, 1989, October 1, 1990, October 1, 1991, October 1, 1992, October 1, 1993, October 1, 1994, or October 1, 1995, and with respect to the assessment list for assessment years thereafter, to the superior court for the judicial district in which such town or city is situated, which shall be accompanied by a citation to such town or city to appear before said court. Such citation shall be signed by the same authority and such appeal shall be returnable at the same time and served and returned in the same manner as is required in case of a summons in a civil action. The authority issuing the citation shall take from the applicant a bond or recognizance to such town or city, with surety, to prosecute the application to effect and to comply with and conform to the orders and decrees of the court in the premises. Any such application shall be a preferred case, to be heard, unless good cause appears to the contrary, at the first session, by the court or by a committee appointed by the court. The pendency of such application shall not suspend an action by such town or city to collect not more than seventy-five per cent of the tax so assessed or not more than ninety per cent of such tax with respect to any real property for which the assessed value is five hundred thousand dollars or more, and upon which such appeal is taken. If, during the pendency of such appeal, a new assessment year begins, the applicant may amend his application as to any matter therein, including an appeal for such new year, which is affected by the inception of such new year and such applicant need not appear before the board of tax review or board of assessment appeals, as the case may be, to make such amendment effective. The court shall have power to grant such relief as to justice and equity appertains, upon such terms and in such manner and form as appear equitable, and, if the application appears to have been made without probable cause, may tax double or triple costs, as the case appears to demand; and, upon all such applications, costs may be taxed at the discretion of the court. If the assessment made by the board of tax review or board of assessment appeals, as the case may be, is reduced by said court, the applicant shall be reimbursed by the town or city for any overpayment of taxes, together with interest and any costs awarded by the court, or, at the applicant's option, shall be granted a tax credit for such overpayment, interest and any costs awarded by the court. Upon motion, said court shall, in event of such overpayment, enter judgment in favor of such applicant and against such city or town for the whole amount of such overpayment, together with interest and any costs awarded by the court. The amount to which the assessment is so reduced shall be the assessed value of such property on the grand lists for succeeding years until the tax assessor finds that the value of the applicant's property has increased or decreased.

      (P.A. 88-230, S. 1, 12; P.A. 89-231, S. 4, 5; P.A. 90-98, S. 1, 2; 90-266, S. 4, 6; P.A. 91-221, S. 4, 5; P.A. 92-254, S. 4, 6; P.A. 93-95, S. 4, 5; 93-142, S. 4, 7, 8; P.A. 95-220, S. 4-6; 95-283, S. 17, 68; P.A. 96-1, S. 3-5; 96-261, S. 1, 3, 4.)

      History: P.A. 90-266 extended applicability to assessment list for year commencing October 1, 1990, effective June 8, 1990, and applicable to appeals from boards of tax review for assessment years commencing October 1, 1989, and October 1, 1990; P.A. 91-221 extended applicability to assessment list for year commencing October 1, 1991, effective June 10, 1991, and applicable to appeals from boards of tax review for assessment years commencing October 1, 1989, October 1, 1990, and October 1, 1991; P.A. 92-254 extended applicability to assessment list for year commencing October 1, 1992, effective June 3, 1992, and applicable to appeals from boards of tax review for assessment years commencing October 1, 1989, October 1, 1990, October 1, 1991, and October 1, 1992; P.A. 93-95 extended applicability to assessment list for year commencing October 1, 1993, or October 1, 1994, effective June 2, 1993, and applicable to appeals from the board of tax review in any municipality for the assessment years commencing on October first in 1989, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993 and 1994; P.A. 95-283 changed location of appeal from the judicial district in which the town or city is located to the judicial district of Hartford-New Britain and changed the name of the board of tax review to the board of assessment appeals, effective October 1, 1996 (Revisor's note: P.A. 88-230, 90-98, 93-142 and 95-220 authorized substitution of "judicial district of Hartford" for "judicial district of Hartford-New Britain", effective September 1, 1998). P.A. 96-1 repealed changes made by public act 95-283 and revised wording of previously existing law, effective March 6, 1996, and applicable to assessment years of municipalities commencing on or after October 1, 1995; P.A. 96-261 also repealed changes made by P.A. 95-283 and made technical change in previously existing law, effective June 10, 1996.

      Annotations to repealed section 12-118 entitled "Appeals from Connecticut Appeals Board for Property Valuation" and present section:

      Court on appeal will not reduce the valuation below that given in by owner. 63 C. 321; 65 C. 465. Taxpayer not aggrieved unless the improper listing of his own or other's property increases his tax. Id., 456. Assessment reduced to rule of valuation of assessors. 63 C. 322; 65 C. 461. Not necessary for defendant to claim penalty as to costs in his answer. 65 C. 456. Shareholders in one company severally affected by ruling of the board may join in appeal. 72 C. 293. What form of appeal sufficient. Id., 329. Right to enforce payment suspended by appeal, but not the running of interest. Id., 599. Burden of proof is on appellants. 75 C. 281. Appeal to be disposed of on equitable principles. Id., 283. Appeal from refusal of board to deduct ten per cent added by assessors; effect of failure to appear before board. 77 C. 108. Voluntary payment of tax will result in dismissal of appeal. 78 C. 675. Court may add property to list. 83 C. 497. Allegation on appeal of ownership of "140 acres more or less" as justifying assessors in making out delinquent's list for 175 acres; effect of failure to file list on appeal. 89 C. 438. Nature of proceeding. 90 C. 160. One upon whose property the assessors put an excessive valuation, which the board erroneously refuses to reduce, is aggrieved. 99 C. 332. A municipal corporation may not reduce a list after revision by the board on appeal. 102 C. 217. Town or city should be cited in on all appeals from board. 107 C. 700. Liability to pay interest does not make payment of tax involuntary; recovery of money so paid not allowed. 108 C. 49. But see 92 C. 199. Taxpayer not aggrieved where court finds property assessed at true and full value despite error in method of valuation. 115 C. 580. Superior court has great discretionary power. 119 C. 13. Cited. 127 C. 21; 130 C. 702. Court not limited to determining whether board acted illegally, arbitrarily or in abuse of discretion. 131 C. 184. Cited. Id., 275; Id., 584. Cited. 133 C. 241. Cited. 143 C. 100. Cited. 144 C. 374. Proper procedure in questioning valuation of property. 146 C. 165. Court has broad discretionary power in granting relief. Id., 578. Motion must be filed before the close of the session in which the judgment was rendered. 151 C. 79. Persons aggrieved by denial of application for classification of land as farm land may appeal to courts as herein provided. 156 C. 107. Cited. Id., 439. This is the general appeals section for chapter 203 and applies to appeals from denial of a tax exemption. 158 C. 138. Scope of court review. 163 C. 433. Cited. 166 C. 232. Cited. 169 C. 454. Cited. 170 C. 477. Cited. 174 C. 380. Cited. 175 C. 301. Cited. 178 C. 295; Id., 606. Cited. 182 C. 619. Cited. 193 C. 342. Last sentence intended to address a problem created when actions of assessor and the board result in an inequitably high tax and such is carried forward on subsequent lists. 195 C. 48. Cited. 196 C. 487. Cited. 200 C. 697. Cited. 203 C. 425; Id., 586. Cited. 204 C. 137. Cited. 212 C. 639. Cited. 220 C. 335. Cited. 224 C. 110. Cited. 226 C. 92; Id., 407. Cited. 228 C. 23. Cited. 236 C. 710.

      Cited. 6 CA 330. Cited. 7 CA 496. Cited. 8 CA 209. Cited. 11 CA 566. Cited. 15 CA 513; Id., 752. Cited. 17 CA 166. Cited. 21 CA 275. Cited. 26 CA 545. Cited. 31 CA 155. Cited. 33 CA 270. Cited. 41 CA 249; Id., 421.

      Cited. 4 CS 391. Statute aims at rectifying an assessment grievance and not against the payment of a tax. 5 CS 467. No remedy exists by appeal to courts from doings of assessors; appeal limited to actions by board. 6 CS 505. Who is a person aggrieved. 12 CS 47. Common pleas has no jurisdiction to hear appeal, when. Id., 382. Cited. 16 CS 50. Board in assessing commercial real estate found to have chosen an unrealistic annuity method of amortizing building costs and to have made unwarranted assumptions concerning management costs, stability of expenses and income. 20 CS 476. Where taxpayer and city stipulated on removal of property from tax rolls, taxpayer not allowed to intervene since to do so would usurp function of corporation counsel. 22 CS 61. Taxpayer claiming to be aggrieved by assessment of tax under section 12-58 may seek relief as provided by this section or section 12-119 or may pay the tax, under proper protest, and sue to recover such money as was illegally paid. He may not, in an action to collect the tax, contest the valuation placed on his property. 25 CS 467. Plaintiff who had brought timely appeal under this section which was nonsuited not entitled to rely on section 52-592 to bring new appeal on same cause of action after two-month limitation had run, since proceeding involving appeal under section 12-107c(d) is not type of action which comes within saving protection of section 52-592. 26 CS 168. A person aggrieved by the action of a board of tax review is not required to appeal to the court of common pleas when the constitutionality of the statute under which the tax was imposed is challenged. 32 CS 82. Discussed. Id., 139. Cited. 33 CS 175. Cited. 39 CS 142. Cited. 41 CS 457.

      Annotations to present section 12-117a:

      Cited. 226 C. 407. P.A. 91-221, Sec. 4 cited. Id. Cited. 227 C. 826. Cited. 228 C. 23. Cited. 229 C. 618. Cited. 231 C. 731. To the extent that conditional approvals deprive taxpayers of immediate economic returns from their investment, such conditional approvals raise issues only of valuation, which properly may be addressed only by appeals under this section. 232 C. 335. Cited. Id., 392. Cited. 240 C. 192; Id., 469; Id., 475. Cited. 241 C. 382; Id., 749. Bar to action must at any time use as its initial reference point the assessment date and not the date of the decennial revaluation. 242 C. 363. Judgment of appellate court in Ireland v. Wethersfield, 41 CA 421, reversed, Id., 550. Cited. Id., 727. Subsequent title holder has no greater rights to challenge prior assessment than were possessed by its immediate assignor or by any prior assignee from the owner of a property at the time of assessment. 249 C. 1. Allegations of certain violations of public policy, such as a person's entering into an invalid contract or unauthorized practice of law, do not bar the person from a property tax appeal. 253 C. 255.

      Cited. 31 CA 115; Id., 793; judgment reversed, see 229 C. 618. P.A. 91-221, Sec 4 cited. Id. Cited. 35 CA 269. Cited. 38 CA 158; Id., 165. Cited. 40 CA 64. Cited. 42 CA 318. Cited. 43 CA 169. Cited. 44 CA 494; Id., 517. Cited. 46 CA 338. Assessor's method that treated plaintiff's properties as individual lots rather than one merged lot resulted in unfair treatment and a wrongful assessment, and therefore, plaintiff was aggrieved. 61 CA 834. Sec. 22a-45 does not limit property owner's remedy pursuant to this section. 80 CA 630. Plaintiff may not limit parameters of the court's valuation determination by challenging only one portion of the assessment because court determinations under this section are de novo and court must arrive at its own conclusions by weighing all the evidence regardless of any alleged judicial admission as to scope of review; Defendant town is not required to file a special defense under this section; plaintiff who attempted to limit court's review to only one portion of an assessment was not deprived due process when entire assessment was reviewed because Connecticut law has consistently held that trial court exercises de novo review. 84 CA 473. Statute allows taxpayer to challenge an illegal assessment outside prior statutorily mandated revaluation period and such appeal does not constitute impermissible request for interim revaluation. 85 CA 480.