- 42 -
of a building". Scott Paper Co. v. Commissioner, 74 T.C. at 183.
In Scott Paper Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 182-183, which
involved a claimed credit for electric wiring, we stated:
Although we give great weight to respondent's
regulations, it would be improper to read the words
"electric wiring" in a vacuum and conclude that those
electric cables, therefore, must be structural
components. Rather, the effect of the final element of
that same subparagraph, which reads "and other
components relating to the operation or maintenance of
a building," must be taken into account. That final
element functions as a descriptive phrase intended to
present the basic test used for identifying structural
components. The preceding elements are examples of
items which meet that test as a general rule. Items
which occur in an unusual circumstance and do not
relate to the operation or maintenance of a building
should not be structural components despite being
listed in section 1.48-1(e)(2), Income Tax Regs. * * *
Accordingly, the critical test * * * is whether they
[the electric wiring and fixtures] relate to the
overall operation and maintenance of a building.
* * * [Fn. refs. omitted.]
See also Everhart v. Commissioner, 61 T.C. at 331; Ponderosa
Mouldings, Inc. v. Commissioner, 53 T.C. 92, 96 (1969).
In Scott, we held that "a logical and objective measure of
electrical load exists, allowing an allocation between the
structural and process functions which are served by the
electrical components." Scott Paper Co. v. Commissioner, supra
at 185. Based on this objective evidence, we held that the
components of a primary electrical system were tangible personal
property to the extent they provided power for the taxpayer's
process machinery, and we disallowed ITC's only for the
Page: Previous 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011