Opinion ID: 1493857
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Holding and operating property for profit.

Text: The operator's function was not one of conservation of assets merely. The very essence of the business engaged in was the purchase of property for reinvestment. The language of the agreement itself provides for the profitable resale thereof, and further: The Operator may, from time to time, incur such costs, expenses and charges in connection with the acquiring, holding, renting, selling or protecting of said properties, as it may deem proper. (Emphasis supplied.) The evidence is clear that the Operator engaged in and performed all of these functions in connection with the land at a good profit. We are of the opinion that the facts of this case are sufficient to support the findings of the Tax Court that the petitioners were associated as a corporation within the meaning of the tax laws. Its decision is affirmed.