In Greenwich Retail, LLC v Town of Greenwich, the Connecticut Appellate Court affirmed a trial court’s ruling upholding a 10% tax penalty imposed on the property owner for failure to timely submit income and expense information under General Statutes § 12-63c. The case addressed a key statutory interpretation question: must a tax assessor’s form be actually received by a taxpayer in order to be “provided” within the meaning of the statute?
The property owner argued that it never received the required income and expense reporting form because it was sent to an outdated address. The Town countered that it had mailed the form to the last known address on file, satisfying the statutory obligation.
The Appellate Court agreed with the Town, concluding that the term “provided” under § 12-63c does not require actual receipt. The court emphasized that assessors are only required to supply or make the form available—typically via mailing to the last known address—rather than guarantee delivery. The court found no statutory language requiring confirmation of actual receipt, and declined to impose one judicially.
This decision clarifies that Connecticut assessors fulfill their statutory duty when they mail forms to the last known address of a property owner, shifting the burden to taxpayers to ensure that assessors have current contact information. The case also underscores the importance of responding promptly to follow-up notices, even if initial mailings are missed.
Property owners must keep assessor records updated and remain vigilant about statutory deadlines. A missed mailing—if sent to the last known address—will not excuse noncompliance or avoid penalties.