- 108 -
Biphenyls (PCBs) Manufacturing, Processing, Distribution in
Commerce and Use Prohibitions; Use in Electrical Equipment, 47
Fed. Reg. 37,342 (Aug. 25, 1982) (codified at 40 C.F.R. pt. 761).
We find that these statutes and regulatory materials fail to
provide the specifications and amount of property for which
petitioner seeks ITCs. TRA section 204(a)(3) requires that the
terms of the supply contract and related documents readily
identify the specifications and amount of the property. These
regulatory materials provide guidelines that are generally
applicable; however, they do not specifically refer to
petitioner’s property.
Petitioner’s reliance on regulatory guidance to readily
identify its property is similar to that of the taxpayer in Bell
Atl. Corp. v. United States, 224 F.3d at 221, which relied on
service quality standards in its utility franchises, tariffs, and
contracts with other telephone companies to identify property for
purposes of TRA section 204(a)(3). In Bell Atl. Corp., the court
found that the terms of the utility franchise, tariffs, and
contracts with other telephone companies did not readily identify
the taxpayer’s property because “these alleged ‘contracts’ speak
only of service quality standards, never mentioning property of
any sort.” Id. at 224.
Page: Previous 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011