- 18 -
received after the earlier of (1) 180 days after the transfer of
property relinquished in such exchange, or (2) the due date of
the return, including extensions, for the year in which the
relinquished property is transferred. Petitioner’s return for
1988, the year in which the transfer of his interest in RPDS
occurred, was due on April 15, 1989. That due date was less than
180 days after the transfer of his interest in RPDS, and so it
marks the end of the time allowed for completing the exchange of
such interest for like-kind property. Petitioner did not receive
the Sheffield lot until May 17, 1989. Consequently, petitioner
failed to complete the exchange of his interest in RPDS for the
Sheffield lot within the statutorily prescribed time limit. Sec.
1031(a)(3)(B)(ii). Furthermore, respondent contends, and
petitioner does not dispute, that the transfer of the Sheffield
lot to petitioner occurred 194 days after petitioner transferred
his interest in RPDS.7 Consequently, the exchange of
petitioner’s interest in RPDS for the Sheffield lot was not
completed within the 180-day period prescribed by section
1031(a)(3)(B)(i). Accordingly, the Sheffield lot is not property
of a like kind received in exchange for petitioner’s interest in
7
Indeed, other than objecting to respondent’s proposed
ultimate finding of fact that the transaction involving the
Sheffield lot was not a qualified exchange under sec. 1031(a),
petitioner makes no argument on brief with respect to the
Sheffield lot transaction.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011