Galedrige Construction, Inc. - Page 28

                                       - 28 -                                         
          Indus. Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 503.  The best method is not           
          necessarily the one that produces the most tax in a particular              
          year.  Id.                                                                  
               Respondent's final argument is that if petitioner is to                
          establish that respondent has abused her discretion, petitioner             
          must demonstrate substantially identical results between                    
          petitioner's method and the method selected by respondent.  We              
          disagree.  We have found that petitioner does not have any                  
          inventories.  Respondent's contention that we must apply the                
          substantial-identity-of-results test17 in cases where the                   
          taxpayer is not required to maintain an inventory is without                
          support in the case law.  Ansley-Sheppard-Burgess Co. v.                    


               17   The substantial-identity-of-results test is a judicial            
          creation; the test was first articulated in Wilkinson-Beane, Inc.           
          v. Commissioner, 420 F.2d 352 (1st Cir. 1970).  In that case, a             
          cash-method taxpayer who was required to maintain an inventory              
          and thus report income on the accrual basis argued that the                 
          difference in income determined by the method it used and the               
          method selected by the Commissioner was negligible. The court               
          found that where the Commissioner has determined that the                   
          accounting method used by a taxpayer does not clearly reflect               
          income, in order to prevail, "the taxpayer must demonstrate                 
          substantial identity of results between his method and the method           
          selected by the Commissioner."  Id. at 356.                                 
               In Ansley-Sheppard-Burgess Co. v. Commissioner, 104 T.C.               
          367, 377 (1995), we held that a taxpayer that is required to use            
          the inventory method of accounting must meet the substantial-               
          identity-of-results test in order to show that the Commissioner's           
          determination requiring it to change from the cash method to the            
          accrual method of accounting was an abuse of discretion.                    
          However, respondent's contention that we must apply the                     
          substantial-identity-of-results test in cases where the taxpayer            
          is not required to use an inventory is without support in case              
          law.  Id.                                                                   





Page:  Previous  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011