Excerpts of the Board's Determination follow:
Turning to the case at hand, both parties agreed the 2006 assessment under appeal increased over 5% from the 2005 assessment. They further agreed the Respondent has the burden of proof. The Respondent, therefore, had the burden of proving the March 1, 2006 assessment is correct.
…
Ms. Gaiter claimed the PTABOA determined the Petitioner presented no evidence to support his request to change the 2006 assessment to the 2005 assessed value. She also claimed the subject land was assessed using the same rate as all other parcels on that road. These assertions are not helpful in determining the subject property’s market value-in-use as of the valuation date of January 1, 2005.
Ms. Gaiter asserted the Petitioner purchased the property for $825,000 in August of 2005. She did not present any evidence to support this assertion. Mr. Smith presented the subject PRC for 2006 that does reflect in the transfer of ownership section that the property was transferred for $825,000 and was recorded on August 4, 2006. This does not explain the sale transaction in any detail. For example, it does not give a description of the specific property or any other arrangements of what was transferred or sold. Ms. Gaiter’s de minimis evidence is not sufficient to make a prima facie case.
Mr. Smith contended that the annual adjustment was not calculated correctly thereby causing the subject assessment not to be uniform or equal in relation with surrounding properties. He presented no evidence to support this contention. He alleged that an assessment cannot be changed based on its purchased price. Contrary to his opinion, sales information regarding the subject property is often the most persuasive way to prove a case.
Because the assessor failed to provide probative evidence that the current assessment is correct, the Petitioner’s duty to provide substantial evidence to support a more accurate assessment is not triggered. See Lacy Diversified Indus. v. Dep’t of Local Gov’t Fin., 799 N.E.2d 1215, 1221-1222 (Ind. Tax Ct. 2003); Whitley Products, Inc. v. State Bd. of Tax Comm’rs, 704 N.E.2d 1113,1119 (Ind. Tax Ct. 1998)
In other cases where the Respondent had the burden to prove the assessment is correct and the Respondent failed to carry that burden, the Board has ordered that the assessment be returned to the assessed value of the year before. In this case doing so reduces the assessment to $152,600.
