Sec. 111.207. TOLLING OF LIMITATION PERIOD. (a) In determining the expiration date for a period when a tax imposed by this title may be assessed, collected, or refunded, the following periods are not considered:
(1) the period following the date of a tax payment made under protest, but only if a lawsuit is timely filed in accordance with Chapter 112;
(2) the period during which a judicial proceeding is pending in a court of competent jurisdiction to determine the amount of the tax due;
(3) the period during which an administrative redetermination or refund hearing is pending before the comptroller; and
(4) the period during which an indictment or information is pending for a felony offense related to the administration of the Tax Code against any taxpayer or any person personally liable or potentially personally liable for the payment of the tax under Section 111.0611.
(b) The suspension of a period of limitation under Subsection (a)(1), (2), or (3) is limited to the issues that were contested under those subdivisions.
(c) A bankruptcy case commenced under Title 11 of the United States Code suspends the running of the period prescribed by any section of this title for the assessment or collection of any tax imposed by this title until the bankruptcy case is dismissed or closed. After the case is dismissed or closed, the running of the period resumes until finally expired.
(d) Repealed by Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1310, Sec. 121(24).
Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 1510, ch. 389, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1982. Amended by Acts 1983, 68th Leg., p. 459, ch. 94, Sec. 3, eff. May 10, 1983; Acts 2003, 78th Leg., ch. 1310, Sec. 91, 121(24), eff. June 20, 2003.
Amended by:
Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 68 (S.B. 934), Sec. 13, eff. September 1, 2011.
SUBCHAPTER E. ASSIGNMENT OF TAX CLAIMS
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
20
cases, 1994–2020 · leading case:
Borden, Inc. v. Sharp, 888 S.W.2d 614 (Tex. App.—Austin 1995).
Borden, Inc. v. Sharp, 888 S.W.2d 614 (Tex. App.—Austin 1995).
· cites it 3× “201 (West 1992) (specifying that taxes must be assessed within four years); Tex.Tax Code Ann. § 111.107 (West 1992) (mandating that the period to file a reftmd claim is identical to the period for assessment); Tex.”
Strayhorn v. Willow Creek Resources, Inc., 161 S.W.3d 716 (Tex. App.—Austin 2005).
· cites it 2× “First, the amending act stated, “The changes in law made by this Act to Chapter 111, Tax Code, apply only to a claim for a refund made on or after the effective date of this Act, without regard to whether the taxes that are the subject of the claim were due before, on, or after…”
Sharp v. AMSCO Steel Co., 893 S.W.2d 742 (Tex. App.—Austin 1995).
· cites it 2× “Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 111.207 (a)(3) (West 1992).”
Wilson v. State, 272 S.W.3d 686 (Tex. App.—Austin 2008).
“” Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 111.207 (a)(3). Also under section 111.”
Borden, Inc. v. John Sharp, No. 03-94-00074-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Dec. 7, 1994).
· cites it 3× “107 (West 1992) (mandating that the period to file a refund claim is identical to the period for assessment); Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 111.207 (d) (West 1992) (providing a tolling period during pendency of administrative proceedings).”
John Sharp v. Amsco Steel Co., No. 03-94-00169-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 22, 1995).
· cites it 3× “Tex. Tax Code Ann. § 111.207 (a)(3) (West 1992).”
Glenn Hegar v. Mahindra USA, Inc., No. 03-18-00126-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 28, 2020).
“Tex. Tax Code § 111.207(a)–(b). With this statutory framework in mind, we turn to the procedural history of this case.”
Tex. Tax Code § 111.207(a): 1 case
Glenn Hegar v. Mahindra USA, Inc., No. 03-18-00126-CV (Tex. App.—Austin Feb. 28, 2020).
“Tex. Tax Code § 111.207(a)–(b). With this statutory framework in mind, we turn to the procedural history of this case.”
Tex. Tax Code § 111.207(d): 2 cases
Borden, Inc. v. Sharp, 888 S.W.2d 614 (Tex. App.—Austin 1995).
“201 (West 1992) (specifying that taxes must be assessed within four years); Tex.Tax Code Ann. § 111.107 (West 1992) (mandating that the period to file a reftmd claim is identical to the period for assessment); Tex.”
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.