The capital cost for investment tax credit purposes of a new sawmill that the taxpayer purchased out of expropriation proceeds was the actual cost of the facility, rather than the deemed lower cost under s. 44(1)(f), given that there was ambiguity as to whether the definition in s. 44(1)(f) extended to the remaining provisions of the Act (other provisions stated explicitly that they applied for purposes of the Act) and given that a reduction for expropriation proceeds would thwart the apparent intention of Parliament in encouraging taxpayers such as the taxpayer to invest.