- 45 -
property from the work-in-progress account into the unimproved
land and vacant lot account.
In regard to investment properties, petitioner listed the
properties (such as the Fontana drive-in, the Fontana coffee
shop, the Kendall drive-in, and the Banning drive-in) under the
land account no. 1210, under the building account no. 1220, or
under the undeveloped or vacant land account. Some investment
properties were listed under the work-in-progress accounts
temporarily. Later (after completion of the buildings, though
this is not entirely clear), the properties were moved to land
accounts, building accounts, or undeveloped land accounts.
Presented only with the accounting records and Mr. Baker's
statements, we are not persuaded that Mr. Baker's conclusions
that petitioner's accountants misclassified properties on its
financial records are accurate.
As with its other subdivision properties, petitioner listed
the Exchange Property in the work-in-progress account from 1983
to 1989. Further, petitioner never moved the Exchange Property
out of the work-in-progress account (even though petitioner
alleges it decided in 1983, or later in 1987-88 after completion
of the 14 lots, not to subdivide the Exchange Property). This
treatment reflects petitioner's intent to keep the inactive phase
of the 48 lots in the Exchange Property in the work-in-progress
account until development of the houses.
Page: Previous 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011