Tebarco Mechanical Corporation - Page 12

                                       - 12 -                                         
          maintain inventories, petitioner relies heavily on Simon v.                 
          Commissioner, 176 F.2d 230 (2d Cir. 1949) (buyer and seller of              
          paper box-board maintained no inventory, and was not engaged in             
          business of "merchandising" requiring use of accrual method in              
          computing income for Federal income tax purposes), and stresses             
          the fact that generally it does not take physical possession of             
          any materials it orders.  Petitioner further argues that its                
          practices are consistent with industry customs in that other                
          subcontractors never take title to assigned materials, which they           
          provide to their customers for a particular job.                            
               We find petitioner's argument without merit; not only does             
          it lack factual support in the record, but it fails to provide a            
          defense for petitioner's refusal to account for inventories.                
          Petitioner argues in a circular fashion that pursuant to section            
          1.471-1, Income Tax Regs., it need not maintain inventories,                
          because it never had merchandise held for sale as all materials             
          it acquires are instantaneously applied to a contract,                      
          segregated, and sold.  Under the facts discussed herein, however,           
          petitioner, in any given transaction, acts as both the buyer                
          pursuant to its contract with the vendor, and the seller pursuant           
          to its contract with the general contractor.  In relying on                 
          section 1.471-1, Income Tax Regs., and Ga. Code Ann. sec. 11-2-             
          401, however, petitioner fails to address this critical fact.               
          Moreover, we note that petitioner could have changed the nature             
          of its position as one of "buyer" by describing in the contracts            




Page:  Previous  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011