- 29 - internal inconsistencies, as was involved in Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) v. Commissioner, supra. Respondent distinguishes Standard Oil Co. (Indiana) on the ground that in this case “petitioner treated all of Cordero’s overburden removal costs as mine development expenses deductible under I.R.C. � 616(a) for purposes of applying the provisions of � 291(b)”, not just the amount capitalized. In effect, respondent argues that the overburden removal costs in this case were not treated inconsistently. As an example, respondent notes that for the first part of 1983, Cordero calculated overburden removal costs of $13,743,557 and capitalized and amortized 15 percent of that amount, or $2,061,534, as required by section 291(b). Respondent notes: “If petitioner had treated any portion of Cordero’s overburden costs as production costs, then the applicable percentage rate specified in section 291 would not have been applied against that portion, and a smaller amount of overburden removal costs would have been capitalized and amortized each year.” Application of Section 446 to a Member of an Affiliated Group of Corporations In the case of an affiliated group of corporations, such as petitioner and the members of its affiliated group,Page: Previous 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011