Mississippi Code

Miss. Code Ann. § 27-65-37 (2026)

Assessment of tax by commissioner

✓ current as of July 2026

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

(1) If adequate records of the gross income or gross proceeds of sales are not maintained or invoices preserved as provided herein, or if an audit of the records of a taxpayer, or any return filed by him, or any other information discloses that taxes are due and unpaid, the commissioner shall make assessments of taxes, damages, and interest from any information available, which shall be prima facie correct. However, if in an audit of the records of a taxpayer it is determined that during the period being audited the taxpayer reported and paid tax in accordance with a method used during a prior period which had been audited by the commissioner and not found to result in any additional tax due, the commissioner shall be estopped from collecting any additional tax as a result of the use of this previously audited method for any period prior to notification by the commissioner or his agent during the current audit that use of the previously audited method would result in additional tax being due if it is determined, through all information available regarding this taxpayer, that:
- (a) The method in issue was previously audited by the commissioner with no additional tax determined to be due under such method;
- (b) The method under consideration in the current audit is the same method that was used in the prior audit;
- (c) There has not been a statutory or regulatory change that would have resulted in additional tax being due under this method after the statutory or regulatory change; and
- (d) The taxpayer detrimentally relied on the fact that this method had been previously audited and not found to result in additional tax.

(2) The commissioner shall give notice to the taxpayer of the assessments and demand payment of the tax, damages and interest within sixty (60) days from the date the commissioner mailed or hand delivered the notice. The notice shall be sent by regular first class mail or delivered by an agent of the commissioner. In the case of an individual, the notice shall be sent by mail to the taxpayer or delivered by an agent of the commissioner to the taxpayer, to a manager or general agent at the taxpayer's place of business or to someone above the age of sixteen (16) years at the taxpayer's residence. In the case of a partnership, the notice shall be sent by mail to the partnership or delivered by an agent of the commissioner to any partner, to a manager or general agent at the taxpayer's place of business or to someone above the age of sixteen (16) years at the residence of any partner. In the case of a corporation, limited liability company, joint venture, association, estate, trust or other group or combination acting as a unit, including any government entity, the notice shall be sent by mail to the taxpayer or delivered by an agent of the commissioner to an officer of the entity, to someone above the age of sixteen (16) years at the residence of an officer of the entity or to a manager or general agent at the taxpayer's place of business.

(3) If the taxpayer shall fail or refuse to comply with the notice of assessment or shall fail to petition for a hearing, the commissioner shall proceed as provided in Section 27-65-39.

Codes, 1942, § 10119; Laws, 1932, ch. 90; Laws, 1934, ch. 119; Laws, 1936, ch. 158; Laws, 1938, ch. 113; Laws, 1942, ch. 138; Laws, 1944, ch. 129, § 7; Laws, 1952, ch. 403, § 4; Laws, 1955, Ex Sess, ch. 106, § 1; Laws, 1958, ch. 576; Laws, 2007, ch. 359, § 2; Laws, 2009, ch. 492, § 104; Laws, 2010, ch. 323, § 3, eff. 7/1/2010.

Amended by Laws, 2014, ch. 476, HB 799, 13, eff. 1/1/2015.

Amended by Laws, 2013, ch. 470, HB 892, 6, eff. 1/1/2013.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 10 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1988–2025 · leading case: Fugitt v. Mississippi Dep't of Revenue (In re Fugitt), 539 B.R. 289 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 2014).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Fugitt v. Mississippi Dep't of Revenue (In re Fugitt), 539 B.R. 289 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 2014). · cites it 8× “Validity of Sales Tax Assessment Under Miss. Code Ann. § 27-65-37 , an assessment is deemed prima facie correct if the auditor made it “from any information available.”

Marx v. Bounds, 528 So. 2d 822 (Miss. 1988). · cites it 4× “Bounds failed to meet the burden of proof necessary to overcome the Tax Commission’s assessments which, pursuant to Miss.Code Ann. § 27-65-37, are deemed prima facie correct.”

Blalock v. Mississippi Dep't of Revenue (In re Blalock), 537 B.R. 284 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 2015). · cites it 5× “Miss. Code Ann. § 27-65-37 (1). In order for sales tax assessments to be prima facie correct, they must be made “from any information available,” which, according to the Mississippi Supreme Court, need not be the best information available.”

Fid. & Guar. Ins. Co. v. Blount, 63 So. 3d 453 (Miss. 2011). “Miss.Code Ann. § 27-65-37 (Rev.2010). . Person means and includes any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, corporation, promoter of a temporary event, estate, trust or other group or combination acting as a unit.”

L Harris Constr. Co. v. Mississippi Dep't of Revenue (In re L Harris Constr. Co.), 528 B.R. 664 (Bankr. S.D. Miss. 2015). “Additionally, the MDOR Sales Taxes assessments are based on alternative accounting methods not permitted when adequate records exist, as in this case, to accurately calculate the [Debtor’s] actual tax liability in direct violation of Miss.”

Back Bay Lawnscapes LLC, Lowell Fountain & Bethany Fountain v. Christopher Graham, In His Off. Capacity as The Comm'r of the Mississippi Dep't of Revenue (Miss. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 4× “See Miss. Code Ann. § 27-65-43 (Rev. 2022); Miss.”

Nortrax South, Inc. v. Thornhill Forestry Serv., Inc., 204 So. 3d 837 (Miss. Ct. App. 2016). “See Miss.Code Ann. § 27-65-37 (Supp.2015); Miss.”

Saltwater Sportsman Outfitters, LLC v. Mississippi Dep't of Revenue (Miss. 2023). “” Miss. Code Ann. § 27-65-37 (1). SSO argues that since the records submitted by other taxpayers were “available,” MDOR was required to examine the archived records submitted by all event promoters in the state in order to uncover any documentation they may have submitted of…”

Xieu Ha & Truong Nguyen v. Christopher Graham, In His Off. Capacity as the Comm'r of the Mississippi Dep't of Revenue (Miss. Ct. App. 2025). “Miss. Code Ann. § 27-65-37 (Rev. 2024) (emphasis added); see also Jackson Land Food Mart.”

Fid. & Guar. Ins. Co. v. Joseph L. Blount (Miss. 2008). “34 Miss. Code Ann. § 27-65-37 (Rev. 2010). 35 Person means and includes any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, corporation, promoter of a temporary event, estate, trust or other group or combination acting as a unit .”

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.