Southern Boiler Sales & Service, Inc. - Page 17

                                       - 17 -                                         
          Gross Receipts                                                              
               a.  August 1990 Bank Deposits of $88,181                               
               This issue was not raised in the assignment of errors in the           
          petition nor in petitioner's trial memorandum or supplemental               
          trial memorandum, and the issue probably should be treated as               
          conceded by petitioner.  Rule 34(b)(4).  However, without                   
          objection from respondent, it was raised in petitioner's opening            
          statement at the beginning of the trial and will be treated as              
          tried by consent of the parties.  Petitioner requests the Court             
          to make an ultimate finding of fact that respondent erroneously             
          increased its income for its taxable year ended July 31, 1990, by           
          this $88,181 amount.                                                        
               The parties agree that $88,181 in checks were deposited in             
          petitioner's bank account in August of 1990, were reported as               
          part of gross receipts for its taxable year ended July 31, 1991,            
          and on audit by respondent were removed from that year and                  
          included as gross receipts for the taxable year ended July 31,              
          1990.  There agreement ends.                                                
               The parties disagree as to whether petitioner is a cash                
          basis or an accrual basis taxpayer.  At trial, in response to the           
          Court's direct question, respondent's counsel advised the Court             
          that petitioner was a cash basis taxpayer.  The Court was not               
          advised otherwise thereafter during the trial.  In its post-trial           
          brief, petitioner argues that as a C corporation it necessarily             
          had to be on the accrual method of accounting, citing section               




Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011