1. BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The condensed consolidated financial statements included herein have been prepared by The InterGroup Corporation (“InterGroup” or the “Company”), without audit, according to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in the condensed consolidated financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations, although the Company believes the disclosures that are made are adequate to make the information presented not misleading. Further, the condensed consolidated financial statements reflect, in the opinion of management, all adjustments (which included only normal recurring adjustments) necessary for a fair statement of the financial position, cash flows and results of operations as of and for the periods indicated. It is suggested that these financial statements be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements of InterGroup and the notes therein included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2014. The June 30, 2014 Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet was derived from the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended June 30, 2014.

The results of operations for the three and nine months ended March 31, 2015 are not necessarily indicative of results to be expected for the full fiscal year ending June 30, 2015.

For the three and nine months ended March 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company had no components of comprehensive income other than net income itself.

Basic loss per share is computed by dividing net loss available to common stockholders by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding. The computation of diluted income per share is similar to the computation of basic earnings per share except that the weighted-average number of common shares is increased to include the number of additional common shares that would have been outstanding if potential dilutive common shares had been issued. The Company's only potentially dilutive common shares are stock options. For the three and nine months ended March 31, 2014, the Company did not have diluted earnings per share as the Company had a net loss for the respective periods.

Certain reclassifications have been made to the 2014 consolidated financial statement presentation to correspond to the current year's format. Total equity, net assets, and revenues over expenses are unchanged due to these

reclassifications.

As of March 31, 2015, the Company had the power to vote 85.3% of the voting shares of Santa Fe Financial Corporation (“Santa Fe”), a public company (OTCBB: SFEF). This percentage includes the power to vote an approximately 4% interest in the common stock in Santa Fe owned by the Company’s Chairman and President pursuant to a voting trust agreement entered into on June 30, 1998.

Santa Fe’s primary business is conducted through the management of its 68.8% owned subsidiary, Portsmouth Square, Inc. (“Portsmouth”), a public company (OTCBB: PRSI). Portsmouth’s primary business is conducted through its general and limited partnership interest in Justice Investors, a California limited partnership (“Justice” or the “Partnership”). Portsmouth controls approximately 93% of the voting interest in Justice and is the sole general partner. InterGroup also directly owns approximately 13.1% of the common stock of Portsmouth. The financial statements of Justice are consolidated with those of the Company.

Justice, through its subsidiaries Justice Holdings Company, LLC (“Holdings”), a Delaware Limited Liability Company, Justice Operating Company, LLC (“Operating”) and Justice Mezzanine Company, LLC (“Mezzanine”), owns a 543-room hotel property located at 750 Kearny Street, San Francisco California, known as the Hilton San Francisco Financial District (the Hotel) and related facilities including a five level underground parking garage. Holdings and Mezzanine are both a wholly-owned subsidiaries of the Partnership; Operating is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mezzanine. Mezzanine is the Mezzanine borrower under certain indebtedness of Justice, and in December 2013, the Partnership conveyed ownership of the Hotel to Operating, The Hotel is operated by the partnership as a full service Hilton brand hotel pursuant to a Franchise License Agreement with Hilton Hotels Corporation. Justice also has a Management Agreement with Prism Hospitality L.P. (“Prism”) to perform management functions for the Hotel. The management agreement with Prism had an original term of ten years and can be terminated at any time with or without cause by the Partnership owner. Effective January 2014, the management agreement with Prism was amended by the Partnership. Effective December 1, 2013, GMP Management, Inc., a company owned by a Justice limited partner and related party, also provides management services for the Partnership pursuant to a Management Services Agreement, which is for a term of 3 years, but which can be terminated earlier by the Partnership for cause.

Management believes that the revenues expected to be generated from the operations of the hotel, garage and leases will be sufficient to meet all of the Partnership’s current and future obligations and financial requirements. Management also believes that there is significant value in the Hotel to support additional borrowings, if necessary.

In addition to the operations of the Hotel, the Company also generates income from the ownership of real estate. Properties include apartment complexes, commercial real estate, and two single-family houses as strategic investments. The properties are located throughout the United States, but are concentrated in Texas and Southern California. The Company also has investments in unimproved real property.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

Accounting Standards Update No. 2015-02, Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis. The amendments in this ASU are intended to improve targeted areas of consolidation guidance for legal entities such as limited partnerships, limited liability corporations, and securitization structures (collateralized debt obligations, collateralized loan obligations, and mortgage-backed security transactions). The ASU reduces the number of consolidation models from four to two, thereby simplifying the criteria for consolidation by: (a) Placing more emphasis on risk of loss when determining a controlling financial interest. A reporting organization may no longer have to consolidate a legal entity in certain circumstances based solely on its fee arrangement, when certain criteria are met; (b) Reducing the frequency of the application of related-party guidance when determining a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity (VIE) and changing consolidation conclusions in several industries that typically make use of limited partnerships or VIEs. The ASU will be effective for periods beginning after December 15, 2015, with early adoption permitted. The Company plans to adopt these provisions in the third quarter of 2016 and currently does not expect the adoption to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In May 2014, the FASB issued Update No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606). The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. To achieve that core principle, an entity should 1) identify the contract(s) with a customer, 2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, 3) determine the transaction price, 4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and 5) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. This update is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within that reporting period, and early adoption is not permitted. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of this standard on its financial statements.

In June 2014, the FASB issued Update No. 2014-12, Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period (Topic 718). The amendments require that a performance target that affects vesting and that could be achieved after the requisite service period be treated as a performance condition. A reporting entity should apply existing guidance in Topic 718 as it relates to awards with performance conditions that affect vesting to account for such awards. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant-date fair value of the award. Compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent the compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service has already been rendered. If the performance target becomes probable of being achieved before the end of the requisite service period, the remaining unrecognized compensation cost should be recognized prospectively over the remaining requisite service period. The requisite service period ends when the employee can cease rendering service and still be eligible to vest in the award if the performance target is achieved. This update is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015, including interim periods within that reporting period, and early adoption is permitted. The implementation of the amended guidance is not expected to have a material impact on our consolidated financial position or results of operations.