Pick any Business Law Case and write a 4 Page paper including a Work Essay

Pick any Business Law Case and write a 4 Page paper including a Work Cited Page - Essay Example The facts of the case were simple, Pinnacle Entertainment Inc, a Delaware corporation possessing 97% interest on Belterra Resort Indiana, transferred the title and possession of a riverboat to Belterra Resort Indiana. Pinnacle acquired the remaining 3% interest on Belterra in August of 2001. The Indiana Departments of Revenue conducted an audit of sales tax and use tax of Belterra in 2002 and proclaimed in its assessment that Belterra owed tax amounting to $1,869,783 plus interest and penalty, for acquisition of the riverboat. Belterra protested against the assessment of the Department and the Department after hearing the matter, issued a letter of findings denying the letter of protest. Belterra filed an appeal with the Indiana Tax Court. Both the parties filed for summary motion. The court in Belterra Resort Ind, LLC v. Ind. Dep’t of State Revenue, 900 N.E. 2d 513, 517 granted Belterra’s motion for summary judgment and reasoned that Belterra was not liable for use tax on its acquisition of the river boat due to the fact that the transaction was a contribution to the capital and not the result of a retail transaction (â€Å"Indiana Department of Revenue†). The Revenue Department was not satisfied with this judgment and this led to the case in hand, which was filed in the Supreme Court of Indiana. The problems which the Supreme Court had to sort out before moving with the case were numerous. Firstly, reaching a conclusion that whether the transfer of the river boat from the parent company (Pinnacle) to its subsidiary company (Belterra) was a â€Å"retail transaction† under the Indiana code section 6-2.5-3-2(a), as because the use tax can be imposed on Belterra for the riverboat only when it was acquired under retail transaction (Indiana Department of Revenue v. Belterra Resort). Secondly, the court had to determine whether the riverboat was obtained with or without consideration. Belterra argued that when no consideration was given f or the riverboat, the transaction was not a retail transaction, as  § 6-2.5-4-1(b)(2) states, â€Å"[a] person is engaged in selling retail when†¦he†¦ transfers that property to another person for consideration† (Indiana Department of Revenue v. Belterra Resort ). Thirdly, in the instant case the other critical legal issue was to find out, whether capital contribution by itself meant transfer of property without consideration. Belterra cited Grand Victoria Casino & Resort, LP v. Ind. Department of State Revenue, 789 N.E.2d 1041 to support his contention that capital contribution without consideration gave exemption from taxes (Rucker 827). Fourthly, the court had to determine whether there was exchange of some form of consideration other than cash in between Pinnacle and Belterra. The problem was to get an answer to the questions that â€Å"Was there any other benefit inuring to Pinnacle?† or â€Å"Was there some detriment borne by Belterra?† (Rucker 828). Fifthly, the court had to determine whether the presence of consideration in a transaction is enough to make it a retail sale. Justice Boehm states, â€Å"‘consideration’ is a necessary but not a sufficient condition to render a transaction ‘Selling at retail’† (Rucker 829). This however was contradictory to what Justice Rucker opined before. In the former context it was stated that when capital contribut