The requirement for the exhaustion of administrative remedies for assessment appeals is set forth in Tax General Article §13-514. It states that "unless a person has exhausted all available administrative remedies before the appropriate tax determining agency, the person may not appeal to the Tax Court." This means that the property owner must first appeal to the Supervisor of Assessments, then to the Property Tax Assessment Appeals Board (PTAAB), then to the Maryland Tax Court. The question as to whether a property owner challenging his assessment is required to offer evidence before the Supervisor of Assessments or the Property Tax Assessment Appeals Board as a prior condition to an appeal to the Maryland Tax Court, has been considered in the advice of legal counsel to the department as follows:

"We believe that a taxpayer's administrative remedies may be exhausted so as to entitle him to appeal to the Maryland Tax Court although he did not testify or produce evidence before the Supervisor of Assessments or the Appeal Tax Court (PTAAB) of the County, and that the Maryland Tax Court may not dismiss the appeal for such failure to testify or produce evidence; we believe further that the Maryland Tax Court, in the exercise of its discretionary powers may remand the appeal of an assessment when it reasonably deems such action to be necessary or desirable to the determination of the appeal, and direct the production of stated evidence ..."

The opinion does not alter the requirement that the property owner must appeal the assessment to the Supervisor of Assessments and then to the Property Tax Assessment Appeals Board in order to appeal to the Maryland Tax Court. The opinion establishes that it is not necessary for the appellant to offer evidence or testimony to the Supervisor or the Property Tax Assessment Appeals Board.

This issue has also been addressed by the Circuit Court of Montgomery County in the case of Abraham Radin, et al v Supervisor of Assessments (1967). The Court stated in its opinion that:

"Thereafter, if the taxpayer has done both of these acts, and only if he has done both, is he entitled to have his case reviewed on a further appeal to the Maryland Tax Court. Exhausting one's administrative remedies means, in this Court's opinion, completing the process of taking the necessary steps to reach the Maryland Tax Court. The law does not require that the taxpayer actively offer evidence at the first level before the Supervisor nor does it require that he offer evidence at the second level, before the Appeal Tax Court (PTAAB). It is the duty of the assessing authorities to offer evidence to substantiate its assessment. The taxpayer may desire to stand mute at both levels and then take his final appeal to the Maryland Tax Court on the evidence given by the Assessors. He has this right."

The Court went on to say that:

"Exhausting of administrative remedies means that a taxpayer cannot by-pass the Supervisor, nor the Appeal Tax Court(PTAAB) and instigate his protest to the assessment direct in the Maryland Tax Court. He must therefore (1) protest the assessment to the Supervisor and (2) appeal the refusal of the Supervisor to change the assessment to the Appeal Tax Court (PTAAB), and (3) appeal the decision of the Appeal Tax Court (PTAAB) to the Maryland Tax Court. Each prior step is required to be taken with a prescribed statutory period. But the law does not require him to offer evidence at any time."