Search - 屯门 安南都护府

Thomas Summerson & Sons Limited, [1926] 1 K.B. 131, 9 TC 577, which was followed in No 729 v. ...

Contentions In his notice of appeal, the appellant asserted that: — In 1974, he and Allen E Duke were operating a business venture in relation to imported European antiques. —The profits from such a venture were to be divided equally with Duke. — Duke was to do the buying and selling. — He (the appellant) arranged two letters of credit for the purpose of purchasing antiques in Europe which became part of the inventory of the business venture. —As antiques were purchased by Duke, sums were drawn on these letters of credit in order to pay for the antiques so purchased. — Drawings on the aforementioned letters of credit were as follows: December 14, 1973 $ 142.00 December 18, 1973 8,500.00 December 27, 1973 2,000.00 December 28, 1973 2,672.92 January 18, 1974 20,092.00 January 24, 1974 66.85 January 24, 1974 6,685.08 February 11, 1974 133.15 $40,292.00 —The business venture was unsuccessful and the appellant suffered a business loss in the amount of $22,184.16. — In conjunction with various business activities he expended in 1974 $2,025.16 in relation to business promotion. ...

In order that the sons might share equally in their responsibilities to their parents, Edward drafted a deed dated September 14, 1967 whereby each of the three brothers would acquire a / interest in the property, each paying an amount of $4,000 and assuming / of the carrying costs on the property (Exhibit A-1). ... Counsel for the respondent does not dispute that the appellants’ intention at the time of acquiring a [1] / interest in the property on September 14, 1967 was to have the appellants’ parents follow Dr Zamora’s advice and move to the Saltfleet farm so that they might be closer to their sons. ... Appeals allowed. 1 / interest in the property, an amount of $14,000 was paid by the brothers to Edward as their cash investment in the property (Exhibit A-1). ...

C.R. 308, [1967] C.T.C. 165, 67 D.T.C. 5114, in which Cattanach, J adopts the opinion expressed by Locke, J in Sutton Lumber & Trading Company Limited v Minister of National Revenue, [1953] 2 Ex. ...

(c) The upward adjustment referred to in the immediately preceding paragraph hereof was calculated as follows: Gross proceeds of disposition $158,950.00 Less Minister’s appraisal 8,032.79 Less outlays and expenses 1,791.68 Capital gain $149,125.53 Taxable capital gain (/2 of $149,125.53) $ 74,562.76 Taxable capital gain reported 10,770.99 Adjustment $ 63,791.77 (d) The appellant’s position as to the disposition of his capital property in 1976 and the amount of taxable capital gain is as follows: Gross proceeds of disposition $158,950.00 Less Valuation Day value of appellant’s Capital property as per appellant’s appraisal 135,616.35 Gross gain 23,333.65 Less outlays and expenses 1,791.68 Capital gain (gross) $ 21,541.97 Taxable capital gain (1/2 of $21,541.97) $ 10,770.99 The respondent reassessed the appellant on a taxable capital gain of $74,562.76 on the following assumptions of facts: 2. ... At the hearing, counsel for the appellant filed two appraisal reports, one prepared by Mr P W Bowman of Price Waterhouse & Co and the other by Mr R Carlin, business evaluator with Revenue Canada. ... Mr Aldridge was critical of the Price Waterhouse & Co’s report because the latter did not give adequate weight to the option agreements especially as in the case at bar of a private company; and also because it appraised the company instead of shares which were very restricted. ...

I may add that whereas at the end of 1966 the unpaid loans, according to the evidence of Mr I M Noble, the appellant’s secretarytreasurer, amounted to $1,152,000, ail became paid in 1970 — an indication that perhaps some, at least, of the loans involved were not so doubtful after all. ... Matters might improve or they might not — no one really knew. Nevertheless, as the loans evidently were much better, as such, than was believed to be the case during the years under review, I think that not much above the minimum level should be fixed and granted as a reserve. ... Accordingly — and this is why reference is made to the circumstance — the second filing fee of $15 should be refunded to the solicitors concerned forthwith; the initial deposit of $15 was sufficient. ...

In its 1966 taxation year the Appellant sold 87,500 shares of Bonanza Explorations Ltd (NPL) to Columbia Securities Ltd as follows: January 31, 1966 28,985 @ $1.23 35,651.55 February 28, 1966 28,420 @ $1.23 34,956.60 March 31, 1966 30,095 @ $1.23 37,016.85 87,500 $107,625.00 11. ...

L Berman & Co Ltd v MNR, [1961] CTC 237; 61 DTC 1150; 14. Olympia Floor and Wall Tile (Quebec) Ltd v MNR, [1970] CTC 99; 70 DTC 6085; 15. ... L Berman & Co Ltd v MNR, [1961] CTC 237; 61 DTC 1150; 22. John Francis Boland v MNR, 9 Tax ABC 389; 54 DTC 25; 23. ... MNR v Stewart & Morrison Ltd, [1970] CTC 431; 70 DTC 6295; 53. Stewart & Morrison Ltd v MNR, [1972] CTC 73; 72 DTC 6049; 54. ...

As it claimed depreciation — deduction of capital cost of $19,315.62 — it declared taxable income of $35,415.70. ...

During the taxation years in question, the appellant company received a total amount of $—- in subsidies from the Department of Cultural Affairs and the Canada Council. The amount $—-, received by the appellant in the form of subsidies, constitutes income within the meaning of ss 9 and 248 of the new Act. Alternatively, the amount of $-— was paid to the company in the form of research subsidies, pursuant to paragraph 56(1)(o) of the new Act. ...