- 115 - taxpayers were the ultimate consumers of the property. Accordingly, we looked to the price paid by the taxpayers as the fair market value of the property. See also Klaven v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-299; Weiss v. Commis- sioner, T.C. Memo. 1993-228; Rhode v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990-656; Weintrob v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1990- 513, opinion modified T.C. Memo. 1991-67, affd. and remanded without published opinion sub nom. Wagner v. Commissioner, 31 F.3d 1175 (3d Cir. 1994); Broad v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1986-340. At the outset of our consideration of the instant cases, it is helpful to note several points about the positions of the parties. First, respondent's appraisers valued the single-family houses and one condominium unit on a different basis than they used to value the other 79 condominium units. According to respondent's brief, respondent's appraisers valued the single-family houses acquired by each partnership and one of the condominium units purchased by EA 83-III on a "retail" basis; that is: "As if the properties were purchased separately by individuals." Respondent's brief describes the appraisals of 14 of the single-family houses and the condominium unit at 4107 Medical Drive as follows:Page: Previous 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011