Kaps Warehouse, Inc. - Page 15

                                               - 15 -                                                 
                  This Court has described the requisite control under section                        
            482 as one of "actual, practical control rather than any particular                       
            percentage of stock ownership."  B. Forman Co. v. Commissioner, 54                        
            T.C. 912, 921 (1970), affd. in part and revd. in part 453 F.2d 1144                       
            (2d Cir. 1972).  "The language of section 482 is broad and                                
            sweeping, and its application depends on a finding of either                              
            ownership or control."  Collins Elec. Co. v. Commissioner, 67 T.C.                        
            911, 918-919 (1977); Ach v. Commissioner, 42 T.C. 114, 125 (1964),                        
            affd. 358 F.2d 342 (6th Cir. 1966).                                                       
                  B.  The Parties' Arguments                                                          
                  Respondent asserts that petitioner's income as reported on its                      
            fiscal year 1991 and 1992 Federal income tax returns was                                  
            understated because petitioner gave preferential rebates to its                           
            related entities.  On the other hand, petitioner argues that the                          
            rebates were proper primarily because the accounts payable from the                       
            related entities were uncollectible.  For the reasons set forth                           
            below, we agree with respondent.                                                          
                  C.  Petitioner's Controlled Group and the Effect of the                             
                  Rebates                                                                             
                  Although petitioner, Kapsco, NPC, and KAW were each separate                        
            legal entities, they were related and controlled directly or                              
            indirectly by the same Kirkham family interests during the years at                       
            issue.  Given the ownership and management structure of the                               








Page:  Previous  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011