- 29 -
petitioner’s long and consistently used method was based on
isolated statements made by petitioner’s employees during the
course of the audit and was pursued based on puffing on
petitioner’s Web site. The statements, however, related to
physical life. The statements were overcome by convincing
evidence that the useful lives of the items used in petitioner’s
business were far less than the useful lives determined by
respondent and that the useful lives were reasonably expected to
be not substantially in excess of a year. We conclude that
respondent’s determination was arbitrary or without a sound basis
in fact or law, and, thus, was an abuse of discretion under
section 446(b).
We have carefully considered all of the remaining arguments
that have been made by the parties for a result contrary to those
expressed herein, and, to the extent not discussed above, they
are irrelevant or without merit.
To reflect the foregoing and concessions of the parties,
Decisions will be entered
under Rule 155.
Page: Previous 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Last modified: May 25, 2011