-60-
Rev. Proc. 79-23, supra, does not provide the only circumstances
in which respondent will, in respondent's discretion, terminate a
taxpayer's LIFO election. In any event, one of the four
situations described in Rev. Proc. 79-23, supra, in which
respondent will, in respondent's discretion, terminate such an
election is found in section 3.01(b) of that revenue procedure,
viz, "Failure by the taxpayer to properly elect the LIFO method".
That situation exists in the instant case. We have held that,
contrary to the requirements of section 472 and the regulations
thereunder, Consolidated's LIFO election did not apply to an
entire good or goods subject to inventory and specified in a Form
970. Consequently, Consolidated failed "to properly elect the
22(...continued)
(b) Selection by the taxpayer of a fewer or
greater number of inventory pools than those determined
by an examining agent;
* * * * * * *
(d) The taxpayer improperly including (or
excluding) a specific item in a particular inventory
pool * * *
We do not believe that the situation presented here is described
in sec. 3.02(b) or (d) of Rev. Proc. 79-23, supra. Respondent
does not take the position that Consolidated selected too few or
too many inventory pools, nor does respondent take the position
that Consolidated improperly included or excluded a specific item
in a particular inventory pool. Respondent is arguing, inter
alia, that, regardless of the different types of pools that a
taxpayer may use if such taxpayer elects the dollar-value LIFO
inventory method, that method must be used with respect to a good
or goods subject to inventory and specified in a Form 970 and
with respect to such entire good or goods.
Page: Previous 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011