- 14 -
Burgess Co. v. Commissioner, supra at 375. Considering these
factors, we see no justification for respondent’s determination
that Smith Floors must use the accrual method of accounting.3
To reflect the foregoing,
Decision will be entered
pursuant to Rule 155.
3 Because we have already concluded that Smith Floors was
not required to use inventories, Smith Floors is not obliged to
satisfy the substantial-identity-of-results test in this case.
See Ansley-Sheppard-Burgess Co. Commissioner, supra at 377.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Last modified: May 25, 2011