Texas Codes

Tex. Tax Code § 112.155 (2026)

Judgment

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section TX-LEGstatutes.capitol.texas.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Sec. 112.155. JUDGMENT. (a) The amount of a judgment for the plaintiff shall be credited against any tax, penalty, or interest imposed by this title and due from the plaintiff.

(b) The remainder of the amount of a judgment not credited to a tax, penalty, or interest due shall be refunded to the plaintiff.

(c) The plaintiff is entitled to interest on the amount of tax included in a judgment for the plaintiff equal to the amount of interest that would be due if the tax had been deposited in the suspense account of the comptroller. The interest accrues beginning from the date that the tax was paid until:

(1) the date that the amount is credited against the plaintiff's tax liability; or

(2) a date determined by the comptroller that is not sooner than 10 days before the actual date on which a refund warrant is issued.

Acts 1981, 67th Leg., p. 1517, ch. 389, Sec. 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1982. Amended by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 232, Sec. 19, eff. Sept. 1, 1989; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1423, Sec. 19.13, eff. Sept. 1, 1997.

Amended by:

Acts 2015, 84th Leg., R.S., Ch. 470 (S.B. 757), Sec. 6, eff. September 1, 2015.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1982–2025 · leading case: Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hegar, 484 S.W.3d 611 (Tex. App. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Hegar, 484 S.W.3d 611 (Tex. App. 2016). “See Tex. Tax Code § 112.155. The parties stipulated that Allstate would be entitled to this interest if it prevailed on its refund claims.”

Delta Pipe Fabricators, Inc. v. Bullock, 638 S.W.2d 652 (Tex. App. 1982). “with interest thereon at the annual rate of 6% from March 1, 1979, the date such sum was erroneously paid to the State, through December 31, 1981, and at the annual rate of 10% thereafter until a date determined by the Comptroller of Public Accounts that is not sooner than 10…”

Cirrus Expl. Co. v. Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Pub. Accounts of the State of Texas & Ken Paxton, Attorney Gen. of the State of Texas, 427 S.W.3d 464 (Tex. App. 2014). “CONCLUSION Having sustained Cirrus’s two issues on appeal, we reverse the district court’s judgment and render judgment in favor of Cirrus in the amount of $70,598.”

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Pub. Accounts of the State of Texas & Ken Paxton, Attorney Gen. of the State of Texas v. Championx, LLC (Tex. App. 2025). · cites it 7× “Tax Code §151.051 ...........................”

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Pub. Accounts of the State of Texas & Ken Paxton, Attorney Gen. of the State of Texas v. Championx, LLC (Tex. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “67 use tax, plus statutory interest pursuant to Tex. Tax Code§ 112.155; Page 916 5. The resulting refund amount due from the Comptroller to ChampionX (Taxpayer No.”

Glenn Hegar, Comptroller of Pub. Accounts of the State of Texas & Ken Paxton, Attorney Gen. of the State of Texas v. Am. Airlines, Inc. (Tex. App. 2025). “04 plus interest as set forth in Texas Tax Code § 112.155(c). The Court further ORDERS that Defendants take nothing on their counterclaim and that each party will bear its own costs.”

— Tex. Tax Code § 112.155(c) — 1 case

— Tex. Tax Code § 112.155(c)(2) — 1 case

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.