Consolidated Manufacturing, Inc., M. P. Long Living Trust, Merl Philip Long, Trustee, Tax Matters Person - Page 71

                                        -71-                                          
          customer, even though under no obligation to do so, decided to              
          accept Consolidated's offer to purchase and delivered a customer            
          core to Consolidated and if that core satisfied Consolidated's              
          requirements for acceptance of a customer core, Consolidated                
          (1) purchased that core for a price which generally was equal to            
          the core amount (i.e., the core credit amount) and which was                
          shown on the customer core sales invoice under the column headed            
          "Cores--Price Each" and (2) paid for it by crediting that                   
          customer's customer account receivable in an amount equal to that           
          price (viz, the core credit amount).  The customer core purchase            
          offer amount and the core credit amount for each customer core              
          were set at an amount that the marketplace in which Consolidated            
          acquired customer cores demanded.                                           
               The facts that we have found on the record in this case and            
          the issue under section 471 that is presented to us distinguish             
          this case from Redwing Carriers, Inc. v. Tomlinson, 399 F.2d 652            
          (5th Cir. 1968), and Burrell v. Commissioner, 400 F.2d 682 (10th            
          Cir. 1968), affg. T.C. Memo. 1967-160, the principal cases on               
          which petitioner relies to support its position that Consolidated           
          acquired customer cores in exchange, and not purchase,                      
          transactions.  Consequently, we find petitioner's reliance on               
          those cases to be misplaced.                                                
               The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit began its opinion           
          in Redwing Carriers, Inc. v. Tomlinson, supra, by framing the               
          issue presented to it as follows:                                           




Page:  Previous  61  62  63  64  65  66  67  68  69  70  71  72  73  74  75  76  77  78  79  80  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011