- 20 - deduction represented what petitioners thought was the cost of the improvements.13 On brief, petitioners proposed the following findings of fact: 8. The petitioners were granted six months rent-free use of the retail space at The Mall at Barnes Crossing as a condition of Articles IV and V of their lease agreement in consideration for costs incurred by the petitioners in the build-out of the retail space. * * * 9. The petitioners performed $127,067 of work on the retail space at The Mall at Barnes Crossing, and $18,739 of those expenditures were in lieu of rental payments to be made equally over a six month period by the petitioners. Those rental payments were for the period of December 1995 through May 1996. On opening brief, petitioners state, in pertinent part, as follows: The petitioners received, from their lessor, credit equal to 6 months rent as consideration for the permanent improvements made to the lessor’s real property. Upon the completion of the first 6 months of occupancy, the petitioners commenced paying full rent, with no additional consideration for the improvements made. On answering brief, petitioners state, in pertinent part, as follows: The petitioners received, from their lessor, credit equal to 6 months rent as consideration for the permanent improvements made to the lessor’s real property. Upon the completion of the first 6 months of occupancy, the petitioners commenced paying full rent on the improved property, as if the improvements had been paid for by the lessor, with no additional 13 The parties agree, and we have found, that the cost of the Improvements was $127,067, not $103,388.Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011