A company ("CVI") operated a program through which it sold groups of limited edition prints to individuals, arranged for appraisal and located registered charities to whom the prints could be donated on behalf of the individuals.
The Court found that the Tax Court Judge had committed two errors: in accepting valuation evidence based on the retail market for individual prints when there was a normal market (that through which CVI actually purchased the prints) for the groups of prints the valuator was required to value; and in finding that the fair market value of the property was approximately three times the amount paid for the property by CVI with no credible explanation for the apparent three-fold increase.