GIBSON,
J.:—This
is
an
appeal
from
a
re-assessment
for
the
taxation
year
1964
by
which
the
respondent
added
to
the
income
of
the
appellant
the
amount
of
$16,734.84,
described
in
the
form
T7W-C
accompanying
the
re-assessment
as
profit
on
the
sale
of
2.021
acres
of
land’’;
and
from
a
re-assessment
for
the
taxation
year
1967
by
which
the
respondent
added
to
the
income
of
the
appellant
the
amount
of
$12,151.50
described
in
the
form
T7W-C
accompanying
the
re-assessment
as
follows
:
|
Add:
Profit
on
Sale
of
1.892
acres
of
land
|
$52,360.50
|
|
Less:
Reserve
under
Section
85B(1)
(d)
(ii)
|
40,209.00
|
|
$12,151.50
|
The
subject
transactions
arising
out
of
which
a
profit
was
made
which
prompted
the
respondent
to
make
these
two
re-assessments
were
the
purchase
of
a
parcel
of
industrial
land
in
Toronto
in
April
1962
and
the
subsequent
resale
of
it
in
two
parcels,
one
in
October
1963
and
the
other
in
July
1966.
In
1949
three
men,
Maximilian
Gottlieb,
Walter
Weihs
and
Walter
Kohn,
all
of
whom
had
immigrated
to
Canada
from
Vienna,
Austria
during
or
after
World
War
II
and
who
for
some
years
had
been
employed
in
a
shoe
manufacturing
plant
in
Toronto,
became
associated
in
partnership
in
a
shoe
manufacturing
business.
Later
they
caused
the
business
to
be
incorporated
under
the
name
of
Alpha
Shoe
Manufacturing
Co.
Limited
(hereinafter
sometimes
referred
to
as
Alfa’’).
In
1962
Alpha
was
operating
in
leased
premises
at
53
Fraser
Street,
Toronto
(which
is
located
in
an
old
industrial
area).
These
premises
were
just.
off
King
Street
near
Dufferin
Street.
Then,
Alpha
had
about
a
hundred
employees
and
was
prospering.
Then,
the
premises
were
inadequate
for
the
business
that
was
being
done.
As
a
consequence,
the
shareholders
in
Alpha,
these
three
men,
commenced
to
look
for
new
premises.
Such
new
premises
sought
for
their
type
of
operation
had
to
be
in
an
industrial
area
but,
also
near
a
residential
area,
because
most
of
their
employees
were
in
a
wage
group
which
could
not
afford
substantial
transportation
costs
each
day.
They
found
such
a
parcel
of
industrial
land
in
1962,
consisting
of
3.913
of
land
fronting
on
the
south
side
of
Alliance
Avenue
near
Rockcliffe
Boulevard
in
the
Township
of
York
in
the
County
of
York.
The
vendor
of
this
parcel
of
land
would
only
sell
the
whole
parcel.
The
requirement
of
Alpha
was
only
for
a
parcel
of
land
about
half
that
size,
namely,
about
two
acres.
Accordingly,
the
whole
of
this
property
was
purchased
on
May
17,
1962
for
$63,288.95.
The
property
was
purchased
from
Toronto
Industrial
Leaseholds
Limited
and
title
was
taken
in
the
name
of
a
new
corporation
incorporated
by
letters
patent
under
the
Ontario
Corporations
Act
by
the
name
of
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited.
The
purpose
for
the
incorporation
of
this
company
was
to
permit
it
to
acquire
this
parcel
of
land
and
build
a
factory
on
it.
These
three
men
caused
(through
loans
to
them)
their
respective
wives
to
be
the
owners
of
all
the
shares
in
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited.
The
portion
of
the
purchased
land
excess
to
the
requirements
of
this
corporation
was
sold
in
November
1963
to
one
Louis
David
Craig
and
the
net
proceeds
from
such
sale
was
$50,528.70.
On
October
23,
1965
Walter
Weihs
committed
suicide.
He
was
the
younger
of
the
three
men
who
operated
Alpha
and
he
in
the
main
was
the
driving
force,
so
to
speak,
who
convinced
the
other
two
men
to
go
along
and
as
a
result
caused
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited
to
be
incorporated
and
to
acquire
the
said
parcel
of
land.
He
was
the
production
manager
at
the
shoe
factory
and
the
person
who
attended
to
all
the
details
in
respect
to
this
proposed
new
factory.
At
the
time
of
his
death,
he
was
44
years
of
age.
At
that
time
also,
the
profits
of
Alpha
had
substantially
lessened
from
what
had
obtained
for
some
years
prior.
From
the
time
of
acquisition
in
1962
until
the
death
of
Walter
Weihs
some
preliminary
work
had
been
done
by
him,
in
the
main,
with
the
concurrence
of
the
other
two
men,
with
a
view
to
establishing
this
new
factory.
Some
preliminary
drawings
had
been
obtained,
some
estimates
of
costs
of
building
and
equipment
had
been
obtained,
but
the
evidence
is,
according
to
Mr.
Gottlieb,
that
the
substantial
records
evidencing
this
were
those
of
Mr.
Walter
Weihs
and
were
not
available.
In
any
event,
from
a
a
general
view
of
the
evidence,
it
is
apparent
that
most
of
these
arrangements
were
done,
and
records
made
and
kept
of
same,
as
might
be
expected
in
an
organization
of
this
kind,
on
an
informal
basis.
After
the
death
of
Walter
Weihs
his
widow
was
entitled
to
obtain
a
liquidation
of
his
estate’s
share
in
the
shoe
business
by
reason
of
an
agreement
among
the
shareholders
(see
page
10
and
following
of
Exhibit
1)
;
and
she
also
wished
to
liquidate
the
interest
of
his
estate
in
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited.
The
two
remaining
shareholders
of
Alpha,
Mr.
Gottlieb
and
Mr.
Kohn,
accordingly
took
steps
to
accomplish
both
these
things
for
the
widow
of
Walter
Weihs.
They
also
decided
to
abandon
any
idea
of
causing
a
shoe
factory
to
be
built
on
the
remaining
parcel
of
land
originally
purchased
in
1962.
Their
decision
to
abandon
was
made
for
several
reasons,
among
them,
the
absence
of
Walter
Weihs,
the
requirement
to
liquidate
the
said
two
interests
of
his
estate
for
the
widow,
and
a
general
decline
(during
the
general
period
these
said
two
events
occurred)
in
the
net
profit
of
Alfa.
In
consequence,
this
remaining
parcel
of
land
was
sold
to
Artiss
Industrial
Developments
in
July
1966
for
$84,643.
Part
of
the
purchase
price
was
a
first
mortgage
back
to
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited
in
the
sum
of
$65,000.
Considering
the
whole
of
the
evidence,
the
decision
of
fact
I
make
in
this
case
is
that
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited
was
not
in
the
business
of
buying
and
selling
land
and
did
not
purchase
the
subject
land
for
resale
at
a
profit.
The
sale
of
the
first
parcel
of
this
land
to
Craig
of
approximately
one-half
of
the
purchased.
parcel,
was
a
sale
of
the
part
that
was
excess
to
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited’s
requirements
and
constituted
a
recouping
of
part
of
the
capital
cost
of
the
acquisition
of
this
asset
and
therefore
was
not
part
of
a
transaction
that
should
be
characterized
as
an
adventure
in
the
nature
of
trade.
As
to
the
remaining
part,
in
my
view
at
all
material
times,
there
was
a
bona
fide
intention
on
the
part
of
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited
through
these
three
men
and,
through
them,
their
wives,
to
build
a
shoe
factory
on
the
site
and
to
cause
G.M.G.
Building
Corporation
Limited
to
rent
it
to
Alpha
Shoe
Manufacturing
Co.
Limited.
The
most
critical
fact
in
this
case
which
caused
this
intention
to
be
changed
was
the
suicide
of
Walter
Weihs.
This
caused
the
whole
program
to
be
changed
for
the
other
two
men.
While
in
this
case
there
are
only
some
of
the
indicia
that
often
obtain
in
cases
of
this
character,
nevertheless,
from
a
view
of
the
whole
of
the
evidence
and
a
proper
weighing
of
it,
such
in
my
view
is
the
correct
conclusion.
In
the
result,
therefore,
the
profits
of
$16,734.84
and
$52,360.50
in
1964
and
1967
respectively,
did
not
constitute
and
result
from
an
adventure
in
the
nature
of
trade
within
the
meaning
of
Section
139(1)
(e)
of
the
Income
Tax
Act,
so
that
the
profits
realized
by
the
appellant
in
the
sales
of
these
said
lands
were
not
income
from
a
business
of
the
appellant
within
the
meaning
of
Sections
3
and
4
of
the
said
Act.
The
appeal
is
allowed
with
costs
and
the
matter
is
referred
back
to
the
respondent
for
re-assessment
not
inconsistent
with
these
Reasons.