K & a Litho Process v. Director Revenue K & a Litho Process v. Director Revenue

K & a Litho Process v. Director Revenue

MO.826 , 653 S.W.2d 195 (1983)

    • 5,00 kr
    • 5,00 kr

Utgivarens beskrivning

The issue for determination in this appeal is whether the lithographic process performed by K & A Litho process, Inc., for others is a sale at retail and subject to Missouri Sales Tax. The Director of Revenue's contention that the process was taxable was sustained by the Administrative Hearing Commission and this appeal followed. 1 We reverse. K & A receives a color film transparency from an outside source, such as a printer, advertising agency, or publishing house. By a highly technical and scientific procedure the colors are separated onto a shett of film and a cromalin or color key is prepared. A printer utilizes the color separated film in making the plate which will reproduce in printed color that which was photographically reflected in the transparency. The cromalin or color key shows the proper colors and serves as a guide to the printer in mixing ink colors so as to duplicate the colors in the transparency. Once the printer has used the color separated film and color key they serve no other function and are usually discarded. From the printer's plate comes the finished product, a printed color photograph. 2

GENRE
Yrkesrelaterat och teknik
UTGIVEN
1983
30 juni
SPRÅK
EN
Engelska
LÄNGD
5
Sidor
UTGIVARE
LawApp Publishers
STORLEK
61,1
KB

Fler böcker av En Banc Supreme Court of Missouri

Roy L. Derfelt v. Honorable Robert E. Roy L. Derfelt v. Honorable Robert E.
1985
State Missouri Ex Rel. Albert Earl Norwood State Missouri Ex Rel. Albert Earl Norwood
1985
State Ex Rel. Kenneth Heistand V. State Ex Rel. Kenneth Heistand V.
1985
Ross G. Lavin Respondent Ross G. Lavin Respondent
1990
Estate Myrtle M. Sawade v. State Missouri Estate Myrtle M. Sawade v. State Missouri
1990
State Missouri v. Michael Gayle Gilley State Missouri v. Michael Gayle Gilley
1990