Indiana Code

Ind. Code § 6-4.1-10-1 (2026)

Refund for illegally or erroneously collected tax; time for filing

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaInd. Code CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 1. (a) A person may file with the department of state revenue a claim for the refund of inheritance tax or Indiana estate tax (paid before its repeal) which has been erroneously or illegally collected. Except as provided in section 2 of this chapter, the person must file the claim within:

(1) three (3) years after the tax is paid; or

(2) one (1) year after the tax is finally determined under IC 6-4.1-5-10;

whichever is later.

(b) A person must file a claim for a refund on a form prescribed by the department of state revenue. The claim must include:

(1) the amount of the refund claimed; and

(2) the reason the person is entitled to a refund.

(c) The amount of the refund that a person is entitled to receive under this chapter equals the amount of the erroneously or illegally collected tax, plus interest calculated as specified in subsection (d).

(d) If a tax payment that has been erroneously or illegally collected is not refunded within ninety (90) days after the later of the date on which:

(1) the refund claim is filed with the department of state revenue; or

(2) the department of state revenue receives:

(A) the inheritance tax return and order required under IC 6-4.1-5-10, in the case of a resident decedent; or

(B) the inheritance tax return, in the case of a nonresident decedent;

interest accrues at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum computed from the date under subdivision (1) or (2), whichever applies, until the tax payment is refunded.

As added by Acts 1976, P.L.18, SEC.1. Amended by Acts 1980, P.L.57, SEC.25; P.L.211-2007, SEC.33; P.L.182-2009(ss), SEC.232; P.L.205-2013, SEC.111.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1978–2015 · leading case: Indiana Dep't of State Revenue v. Keenan, 42 N.E.3d 1056 (Ind. T.C. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Indiana Dep't of State Revenue v. Keenan, 42 N.E.3d 1056 (Ind. T.C. 2015). · cites it 14× “If, however, the taxpayer had not filed its refund claim with the Department within the time limits prescribed by Indiana Code § 6-4.1-10-1, the probate court did not have subject matter *1060 jurisdiction to hear the appeal.”

State v. Davies, 379 N.E.2d 501 (Ind. Ct. App. 1978). “(current version Ind. Code 6-4.1-10-1 — 6). 3 . Ind. Code 6-4-1-21 was repealed by 1976 Ind.”

Indiana Dep't of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Div. v. Est. of Schoenenberger, 976 N.E.2d 148 (Ind. T.C. 2012). · cites it 16× “In challenging the probate court’s ruling, the Department claims that interest is to be calculated according to the 2007 version of Indiana Code § 6-4.1-10-1. Accordingly, the resolution of this appeal depends on whether the 1980 or the 2007 version of Indiana Code § 6-4.”

Logal v. Miller, 381 F. Supp. 2d 806 (N.D. Ind. 2005). “§ 6-4.1-10-1. Furthermore, the taxpayer can appeal any claim order by the Indiana Department of Revenue: Sec.”

Indiana Dep't of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Div. v. James F. Keenan & Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Co-Pers. Representatives of the Est. of Judd Leighton (Ind. T.C. 2015). · cites it 12× “LAW Indiana Code § 6-4.1-10-1 governs claims for refund of Indiana inheritance taxes paid.”

Odle v. Indiana Dep't of State Revenue, 991 N.E.2d 631 (Ind. T.C. 2013). · cites it 6× “633-34 (noting that the Estate has, and currently is using, the claim for refund process to challenge its purportedly improper inheritance tax liability); Ind.Code § 6-4.1-10-1 et seq. (2009). 6 In so doing, the Estate has been able to present to both the probate court and this…”

— Ind. Code § 6-4.1-10-1(a) — 1 case

Indiana Dep't of State Revenue, Inheritance Tax Div. v. James F. Keenan & Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Co-Pers. Representatives of the Est. of Judd Leighton (Ind. T.C. 2015). “LAW Indiana Code § 6-4.1-10-1 governs claims for refund of Indiana inheritance taxes paid.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.