Matter of Evans v. Gallman

2 Citing cases

  1. Matter of Petroleum Sales Serv. v. Bouchard

    98 A.D.2d 882 (N.Y. App. Div. 1983)   Cited 2 times

    Also absent is proof from a qualified expert establishing that such losses regularly occur, and there is no evidence that the figures contained in petitioner's records fall within the range of anticipated loss for the particular activity (see Matter of Allied N.Y. Servs. v Bragalini, 4 A.D.2d 802). There is nothing irrational or unreasonable in the Tax Commission's determination which rejected petitioner's conclusory assertion that the discrepancy between purchases and sales must be attributed to losses, rather than some other taxable dispositions. That the Tax Commission has in the past accepted a 1% loss allowance for evaporation and spillage of gasoline from tanks used by distributors exclusively for bulk storage does not undermine the rationality of the determination herein. As this court held in Matter of Evans v Gallman ( 48 A.D.2d 466, mot for lv to app den 37 N.Y.2d 712), there is a rational basis for the distinction drawn by the Tax Commission which results in the recognition of a loss allowance without actual proof of loss for gasoline stored in bulk, but not for gasoline involved in retail trade. Thus, in Evans, as here, the Tax Commission rejected a taxpayer's claim that it was entitled to a loss allowance for evaporation and spillage of gasoline involved in retail trade despite the absence of actual proof of such loss, and this court confirmed the determination.

  2. Matter of Evans v. Gallman

    37 N.Y.2d 712 (N.Y. 1975)

    Decided November 19, 1975 Appeal from (3d dept.: 48 A.D.2d 466) MOTIONS FOR LEAVE TO APPEAL