Tennessee Code Annotated
Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 (2026)
Provisions applicable to municipal taxes
✓ current as of May 2026
- (a) Sections 67-1-901 - 67-1-905 and 67-1-908 - 67-1-910 apply to the recovery of all taxes collected by any of the municipalities of this state.
- (b) In order to carry out the legislative intent that all of such sections, which now apply to the recovery of state taxes erroneously paid, be conformed to apply also to the recovery of taxes erroneously paid to municipalities, the following provisions are added:
- (1) The municipal officer collecting any municipal taxes paid under protest shall pay such revenue into the municipal treasury and, at the time of payment, shall give notice to the mayor and board of commissioners or other governing body of such municipality that the taxes were paid under protest;
- (2) If it be finally determined by any court having jurisdiction of any suit brought within thirty (30) days after such payment under protest against the municipality to recover such taxes that the taxes were wrongfully collected as not being due from the party to the municipality, the municipality shall refund such taxes with such interest as the court may determine to be proper, not exceeding the legal rate, and shall pay the costs of the cause; and
- (3) The city attorney or other legal officer of such municipality shall conduct the defense of such suit.
Acts 1959, ch. 324, § 1; T.C.A., § 67-2313.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11
cases, 1994–2018 · leading case: Roberts v. Sullivan Cnty. (In Re Penking Trust), 196 B.R. 389 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1996).
Roberts v. Sullivan Cnty. (In Re Penking Trust), 196 B.R. 389 (Bankr. E.D. Tenn. 1996). “Because the payments were made under protest, the Treasurer of the City of Kingsport and the Sullivan County Trustee were respectively required, pursuant to Tenn.Code Ann. §§ 67-1-911 and 912, to notify the appropriate governing bodies of the fact that payments were made under…”
Vodafone Americas Holdings, Inc. & Subsidiaries v. Richard H. Roberts, Comm'r of Revenue, State of Tennessee, 486 S.W.3d 496 (Tenn. 2016). “35 was amended by the Department to reflect the 1984 numbering of the variance statutes ( Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 67-1-911 & 67-4-812), but has not been updated to reflect the current numbering of the variance statutes, Tenn.”
Adm. Suites & Inns, LLC v. Shelby Cnty., Tennessee, 138 S.W.3d 233 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). “Whether the lower court erred in failing to dismiss all claims except those for refunds of hotel-motel taxes that were paid under protest in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 . B. Whether the lower court erred in failing to dismiss all claims against the City of…”
Chuck's Package Store v. City of Morristown, 545 S.W.3d 398 (Tenn. 2018). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 (b). There is no corresponding provision in sections 67-1-1801, et seq.”
Bellsouth Advert. & Publ'g Corp. v. Chumley, 308 S.W.3d 350 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “(a) T.C.A. §§ 67-1-911 and 67-4-812 [now Tenn.”
Hoover, Inc. v. Rutherford Cnty., 885 S.W.2d 67 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “§ 67-1-901 on T.C.A. § 67-1-911, pertaining to municipal taxes, rather than county taxes.”
Lebanon Liquors, Inc. v. City of Lebanon, 885 S.W.2d 63 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “T.C.A. § 67-1-911 (1989). Plaintiffs argue that T.”
Chuck's Package Store v. City of Morristown (Tenn. Ct. App. 2016). “The City argues that payment under protest remains a condition precedent to filing suit for the recovery of municipal taxes and that Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 is the “sole remedy” for taxpayers seeking a refund of such taxes.”
Adm. Suites & Inns, Llc v. Shelby Cnty. (Tenn. Ct. App. 2003). “They also argued that the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over some claims, because many of the plaintiffs failed to comply with the requirements of Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 (2003), which sets forth procedural requirements for aggrieved taxpayers in pursuing their…”
Bellsouth Advert. & Publ'g Corp. v. Loren L. Chumley, Comm'r of Revenue, State of Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009). “(a) T.C.A. §§ 67-1-911 and 67-4-812 [now Tenn.”
Vodafone Americas Holdings Inc. & Subsidiaries v. Richard H. Roberts, Comm'r of Revenue, State of Tennessee (Tenn. Ct. App. 2014). “] §§ 67-1-911 and 67-4-812 may be invoked only in specific cases where unusual fact situations (which ordinarily will be unique and nonrecurring) produce incongruous results under the apportionment and allocation provisions contained in the Franchise and Excise Tax Laws Tenn.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911(a) — 1 case
Hoover, Inc. v. Rutherford Cnty., 885 S.W.2d 67 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1994). “§ 67-1-901 on T.C.A. § 67-1-911, pertaining to municipal taxes, rather than county taxes.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911(b) — 1 case
Chuck's Package Store v. City of Morristown, 545 S.W.3d 398 (Tenn. 2018). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 (b). There is no corresponding provision in sections 67-1-1801, et seq.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911(b)(1) — 1 case
Chuck's Package Store v. City of Morristown, 545 S.W.3d 398 (Tenn. 2018). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 (b). There is no corresponding provision in sections 67-1-1801, et seq.”
— Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911(b)(2) — 1 case
Chuck's Package Store v. City of Morristown, 545 S.W.3d 398 (Tenn. 2018). “" Tenn. Code Ann. § 67-1-911 (b). There is no corresponding provision in sections 67-1-1801, et seq.”
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.