Mountain State Ford Truck Sales, Inc., E.P. O'Meara, Tax Matters Person - Page 19




                                       - 19 -                                         

          turing, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra.  The Commissioner's discre-            
          tion under sections 446 and 471 is not unbridled, however.  Thor            
          Power Tool Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 533; Consolidated                  
          Manufacturing, Inc. v. Commissioner, supra.  Even if a taxpayer's           
          accounting method does not result in a clear reflection of                  
          income, the Commissioner may not change the taxpayer's accounting           
          method to another method that also fails to reflect income                  
          clearly.  Harden v. Commissioner, 223 F.2d 418, 421 (10th Cir.              
          1955), revg. 21 T.C. 781 (1954) and affg. Harden v. Hinds, 48               
          AFTR 1268, 54-1 USTC par. 9348 (W.D. Okla. 1954); Rotolo v.                 
          Commissioner, 88 T.C. 1500, 1514 (1987).                                    
               As framed by petitioner, the question relating to the clear-           
          reflection-of-income standard is whether respondent abused                  
          respondent's discretion in concluding that, in computing the LIFO           
          value of its dollar-value parts pool under the link-chain                   
          method,4 Mountain State Ford's use of replacement cost in                   

               4  The parties disputed at trial whether there are deficien-           
          cies in the manner in which Mountain State Ford computed the                
          price indices under its link-chain method.  However, after trial            
          the parties entered into a second supplemental stipulation                  
          regarding those price indices.  According to that stipulation, in           
          the event that the Court were to sustain Mountain State Ford's              
          method of using replacement cost in computing the LIFO value of             
          its parts inventory, respondent's adjustment in the notice to               
          Mountain State Ford's ordinary income for 1991 would be reduced             
          from $463,515 to $53,870.  That reduction would be made in that             
          event in order to reflect the parties' agreement in the second              
          supplemental stipulation to correct certain of the alleged                  
          deficiencies that respondent had found in Mountain State Ford's             
          computation of the price indices under its link-chain method.               
          The parties further agreed in that stipulation that in the event            
          that the Court were not to permit Mountain State Ford's method of           
          using replacement cost in computing the LIFO value of its parts             
                                                             (continued...)           

Page:  Previous  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011