Newhouse Broadcasting Corp. and Subsidiaries, et al. - Page 2




                                                - 2 -                                                  
                  franchise agreement to permit a determination of                                     
                  whether property actually used by M for that purpose                                 
                  may be considered "readily identifiable with" such                                   
                  agreement within the meaning of sec. 204(a)(3), id.,                                 
                  and (2) there are genuine issues of material fact in                                 
                  determining whether all the property actually used is                                
                  "readily identifiable with and necessary to carry out"                               
                  the franchise agreement as required by sec. 204(a)(3),                               
                  id.  Both motions for partial summary judgment shall be                              
                  denied.                                                                              


                  Bernard J. Long, Jr., David E. Mills, and James R. Saxenian,                         
            for petitioner.                                                                            
                  Gary D. Kallevang and William J. Gregg, for respondent.                              


                                        MEMORANDUM OPINION                                             

                  HALPERN, Judge:  Both petitioner Newhouse Broadcasting Corp.                         
            (petitioner) and respondent have moved for partial summary                                 
            judgment.  Each party objects to the other’s motion.  The issue                            
            common to those motions (petitioner’s motion, respondent’s                                 
            motion, or, together, the motions) is whether MetroVision of                               
            Livonia, Inc. (MetroVision), a wholly owned subsidiary of                                  
            petitioner’s, is entitled to an investment tax credit (ITC) on                             
            account of certain property placed in service by it during its                             
            taxable years ended July 31, 1989 and 1990 (the 1989 and 1990                              
            taxable years or the audit years).  The property in question                               
            relates to a cable television franchise awarded to MetroVision in                          
            1983.  The motions require us to interpret the supply or service                           






Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011