PDV America, Inc. and Subsidiaries - Page 22

                                       - 22 -                                         
               Petitioner has demonstrated that the tanks are capable of              
          being moved and have in fact been moved.  Consequently, this                
          factor favors petitioner.                                                   
          B.  Is the Property Designed or Constructed To Remain Permanently           
          in Place?                                                                   
               Petitioner contends that the tanks’ design and construction            
          demonstrate that the tanks are not to remain permanently in                 
          place.  According to petitioner, CITGO designed and constructed             
          the tanks in conformity with industry standards, which enables              
          CITGO to dismantle the tanks and reconstruct them at new sites              
          pursuant to API Standard 653 or relocate them intact with the               
          Watson Air Bag technology.18                                                
               In contrast, respondent contends that the tanks were not               
          designed to be moved to new locations but, instead, were designed           
          to remain in place for their entire economic useful lives.                  
          Comparing the tanks to the property at issue in cases such as               
          Whiteco Indus., Inc. v. Commissioner, 65 T.C. 664 (1975) (outdoor           
          advertising signs); JFM, Inc. & Subs. v. Commissioner, supra                
          (gasoline canopies); and Fox Photo, Inc. v. Commissioner, T.C.              
          Memo. 1990-348 (1-hour photo labs), respondent asserts that the             
          tanks are significantly different for the following reasons:  (1)           

               18Petitioner attached to its posttrial brief a document                
          purportedly describing European tank-moving standards.                      
          Petitioner did not submit this document at trial.  Consequently,            
          the document is not part of the record, and we disregard it.  See           
          Rule 143(b); Lombard v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1994-154 n.3,              
          affd. without published opinion 57 F.3d 1066 (4th Cir. 1995).               

Page:  Previous  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  22  23  24  25  26  27  28  29  30  31  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011