- 26 -
mandatory, indispensable, or requisite", and that the state-of-
the-art requirement, as set forth in the franchise agreements,
reflected "only broad industry standards, not specific
contractual commitments to undertake rebuilds." Id. at 418, 421.
Similarly, we found no evidence to indicate that the taxpayer
"had specific binding commitments, as of December 31, 1985, to
install the line extensions." Id. at 422.
Under our opinion in Southern Multi-Media Communications,
Inc., in order to prove that property placed in service during
the audit years was "necessary to carry out" the Livonia
Franchise Agreement, petitioner must demonstrate that such
property was placed in service pursuant to "specific contractual
commitments" contained in the franchise agreement or in a related
(pre-1986) document. Petitioner argues that it has satisfied
that requirement because MetroVision was "at all times material
engaged solely in the business of providing cable television
service to residents of Livonia, under the authority of the
Livonia Franchise Agreement" and because MetroVision "installed
each unit of property solely to provide cable television service
to residents [of the City of Livonia] as it agreed to do in the
Livonia Franchise Agreement."
We agree with respondent that there are genuine issues of
material fact to be resolved in determining whether all of the
property placed in service by petitioner was "necessary to carry
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011