Vina-Rug (Canada) Limited v. Minister of National Revenue, 68 DTC 5021, [1968] CTC 1, [1968] SCR 193 -- text
ABBOTT, J. (all concurring) :—The issue in this appeal is whether the appellant company was ‘‘associated’’ during the 1961 and 1962 taxation years with a second company, Strad- wick’s Limited, within the meaning ‘of Section 39 of the Income Tax
Edwards v. Canada, 2003 DTC 5667, 2003 FCA 378 -- text
Khan v. The Queen, 2009 DTC 804, 2009 TCC 248 (Informal Procedure) -- text
Sarophim v. The Queen, 2012 DTC 1124 [at at 3131], 2012 TCC 92 (Informal Procedure) -- text
Naguib v. Canada, 2004 DTC 6082, 2004 FCA 40 -- text
GlaxoSmithKline Inc. v. The Queen, 2008 DTC 3957, 2008 TCC 324 -- text
Minister of National Revenue v. Benaby Realties Limited, 67 DTC 5275, [1967] CTC 418, [1968] S.C.R. 12 -- text
JUDSON, J. (all concur) :—The sole question in this appeal is whether a profit of $263,864.03 was properly assessed in the taxation year 1955. The judgment of the Exchequer Court holds that this profit must be excluded in assessing the profits for the
Canada v. Pardee Equipment Limited, 99 DTC 5012, [1999] 1 CTC 101 (FCA) -- text
McDonald J.A.:
The issue to be decided in this case is whether a company, such as Pardee Equipment Limited (the “Respondent”), may claim inventory allowance deductions under s.20(1)(gg) of the Income Tax Act (the “Act”) for goods, the title of which is held by another company, while many of the other incidents of ownership are vested in the taxpayer. In other words, what proprietary interest is required before goods held for sale by a taxpayer may properly be considered its “inventory”.
Vitellaro v. Canada (Customs and Revenue Agency), 2005 DTC 5275, 2005 FCA 166 -- text
Pages
