Hunter v. R., [1997] 3 C.T.C. 3104 -- text

Bonner T.C.J.:

1 This is an appeal from an assessment under the Income Tax Act (“Act”) for the Appellant's 1994 taxation year. In his return of income for that year the Appellant elected to report a capital gain on property (the Leland Hotel) owned by him on February 22, 1994. The designated proceeds of disposition were $150,000, the adjusted cost base was $61,000 and the elected capital gain was $89,000. The taxable capital gain, being 75% of $89,000 was $66,750.

Felray Inc. v. R., 97 D.T.C. 5349, [1998] 2 C.T.C. 4 -- text

Rouleau J.:

1 This is an appeal from a Tax Court of Canada decision dismissing the plaintiff's appeal concerning a notice of reassessment issued by the Minister of National Revenue (“the MNR”) for the 1980 location year in relation to the appropriation of funds of a corporation controlled by the plaintiff.

Saunders v. R., [1998] 2 C.T.C. 3196, 98 D.T.C. 3390 -- text

Bowman T.C.J.:

1 These appeals were heard together and concern assessments for the 1991, 1992 and 1993 taxation years. The issue is the deductibility of losses sustained by the appellants from the rental of property.

2 Marvin Saunders is an engineer with INCO Limited, Judith Saunders, his wife, teaches school. Their combined annual incomes in the years in question were over $100,000.

Burnet v. Minister of National Revenue, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 192, 97 D.T.C. 5346 -- text

Tremblay-Lamer J.:

1 The Applicant seeks an Order of mandamus compelling the Respondent to issue to her, pursuant to subsection 152(1.1) of the Income Tax Act (Canada),[FN1: <p>R.S.C. 1952, c. 148, as amended.</p>] a Notice of Determination of Loss for her 1987 taxation year in an amount not less than $260,460.

Shell Canada Ltd. v. R., [1998] 2 C.T.C. 207, (sub nom. R. v. Shell Canada Ltd.) 98 D.T.C. 6177 -- text

Linden J.A.:

Introduction

1 The question to be decided on this appeal is whether a sophisticated financing plan to obtain for Shell Canada Ltd. (Shell) 100 million U.S. dollars, (US$) utilizing a “Kiwi” loan and certain hedging transactions, has succeeded in reducing the tax that otherwise would be payable.

Interfaith Development Education Assn., Burlington v. Minister of National Revenue, 97 DTC 5424, [1997] 3 C.T.C. 271 (FCA) -- text

Stone J.A.:

1 The appellant, a corporation without share capital, was incorporated under the laws of Ontario by Letters Patent dated September 11, 1985, for the following purposes:

(a) To educate the public and encourage an awareness and understanding of social justice conditions;

(b) To interact with local development and justice organizations as well as churches and missions to further such educational programs.

Pages

Subscribe to Tax Interpretations RSS