- 51 -
In the stipulation of facts, “the parties agree that the
Court may characterize the relationship between petitioner and
Crocus vis-a-vis foreign trade shows based solely on this
Stipulation of Facts and the Exhibits attached hereto and the
opposing party’s admissions filed in this case.” The stipulated
record provides substantial evidence that Crocus performed
significant and substantial services in operating the foreign
trade shows. Inasmuch as Crocus is a separate entity from
petitioner, it is highly unlikely that Crocus would have
performed services at foreign trade shows for nothing more than
the reimbursement of its direct expenses. We are mindful of the
admonition of Judge Learned Hand in Commissioner v. Maresi, 156
F.2d 929, 931 (2d Cir. 1946), affg. 6 T.C. 582 (1946), that “The
one sure way to do injustice in such cases is to allow nothing
whatever upon the excuse that we cannot tell how much to allow.”
See also Gerling Intl. Ins. Co. v. Commissioner, 98 T.C. 640, 659
(1992). Doing the best we can with the gap-riddled record the
parties have created, we find that fees collected by Crocus
during the taxable periods at issue from exhibitors located in
the former Soviet Union were retained by Crocus as compensation
for its services in operating the foreign trade shows. Inasmuch
as it may fairly be inferred and we do find that such fees have
been included in petitioner’s gross income under the stipulation
Page: Previous 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011