Search - 江西农大 毛瑢

The total amount, in other words the full $73,000, was not payable by Redco to Norbraten until two months of consecutive default — in effect, once the account was rendered. ... Whether that calculation is proper, the Board need not determine under the circumstances of this case — that is not the point to be considered at this time. ... The point in this appeal is not whether the amount must be included in the appellant’s income — that is mandatory — but whether if, after such inclusion, a reserve is proper. ...

(a) On the 31st day of December, 1978 — $4,000 (b) On the 31st day of December, 1979 — 4,000 (c) On the 31st day of March, 1980 — 4,000 16. ... (a) the facts hereinbefore admitted; (b) during the 1973 taxation year, the Appellant received the amount of $10,400 as a loan from Bathe & McLellan Construction Limited for the purchase of 200 of the issued and outstanding common shares of HVS Steel Products Limited (“HVS”); (c) during the 1974 taxation year, the Appellant received the amount of $18,000 as a loan from Simcoe Rentals Limited for the purchase of 300 of the issued and outstanding common shares of HVS; (d) during the 1975 taxation year, the Appellant received the amount of $28,000 as a loan from HVS to enable him to repay his outstanding loans to Bathe & McLellan Construction Limited and Simcoe Rentals Limited; (e) by Resolution of the Board of Directors of HVS dated the 22nd day of June, 1978, HVS confirmed and ratified that it had made a loan of $28,000 to the Appellant, which loan was stated to be to enable the Appellant to purchase shares of HVS as of April 2, 1975, and which loan was stated to be repayable by equal annual instalments of $7,000 per annum without interest commencing as of the 2nd day of April, 1976; (f) no amounts had been paid by the Appellant on account of the loan made by HVS in its 1975 taxation year as at the end of its 1976 taxation year; (g) bona fide arrangements were not made at the time and the loan was made by HVS to the Appellant for repayment thereof within a reasonable time; Findings of facts: The evidence of the appellant and Mr McLellan can be briefly summarized as follows: The appellant and two other persons founded HVS Steel Products Limited in 1968. ... Simcoe’s deposit book (Exhibit A-1) shows a deposit of $18,900 on April 2, 1975, with a notation: “P Hendriks — $18,900 (Princ $18,000, Interest $900)”; Bathe’s deposit book (Exhibit A-2) reflects a deposit of $12,686 on April 2, 1975 with a notation: “P Hendriks — $12,686 (Princ $10,400, Interest $2,286)” which is in accord with a statement prepared on Bathe’s letterhead (Exhibit A-3). ...

I would like to quote Exhibit 5 to show the unreported income, the revied total income and the percentage: Exhibit 5 Taxation Unreported Revised % of unreported year income total income income to revised total Income 1973 $18,308.51 $95,967.24 19.08 1974 $ 7,272.00 $116,755.81 6.23 1975 $11,578.99 $114,005.71 10.16 1976 $24,524.16 $109,927.46 22.31 61,683.66 436,672.22 15% Taxation Unreported Reported total % of unreported year income income income to reported total income 1973 $18,308.51 $ 73,764.00 24.82 1974 7,272.00 103,675.00 7.01 1975 11,578.99 96,487.00 12.00 1976 24,524.16 78,470.44 31.13 $61,683.66 $352,396.44 17.50% The Board was not impressed by the appellant’s nor by his accountant’s testimony. ...

Previously the appellant had been involved in the franchise business with Red & White and Lucky Dollar groups. ... He stated that he had never succeeded in selling a commercial building at the municipal assessment, and he put the following valuations on the property at issue as at the beginning of 1968: (a) cost of replacement less depreciation — $47,500 (b) with respect to the income approach — $46,786 (c) according to comparable properties sold in the neighbourhood — $46,000 to $47,000. ... In a case where property comes into the hands of a shareholder without the shareholder giving adequate value in return — and this may happen in the course of the winding up or discontinuance of a business — subsection 81(1) would come into operation. ...

Contentions For the appellant: — The promissory note represented a debt which was acquired by the appellant for the purpose of gaining or producing income from a property. — The promissory note had become a bad debt in 1977. — The promissory note held by the appellant was enforceable but worthless and remains so on this date. ... He was to recover his interest costs by the income from his investment — albeit both of them at the same rate. ... Counsel referred the Board to a recent decision — Robert G Cantin v MNR, [1981] CTC 2918; 81 DTC 811. ...

For record purposes, there are reproduced certain portions from documents which the Board considers to be pertinent to an understanding of the evidence and argument: Exhibit A-1—Document #5—A reporting letter from Simpson & Duncan, Barristers & Solicitors, Hamilton, Ontario, to Robertson-Yates Corporation Limited, dated December 8, 1964: The second mortgage, constituting your main security hereunder from Clearstream to Robertson-Yates Corporation Limited, secures the principal sum of $350,000.00. ... Heinrich Ochs Exhibit A-1—Document #13—Reporting letter from Young & McGuigan, Barristers & Solicitors, Port Credit, Ontario, to Ontra-Desar, dated October 2, 1968: 3. ... The cases of Stanley Cerisano Limited v MNR, 34 Tax ABC 341; 64 DTC 99; Mortimer Investment Corporation v MNR, 41 Tax ABC 433; 66 DTC 539; and J E Verreault & Fils Liée v MNR, 39 Tax ABC 409; 65 DTC 734, were quoted by counsel to substantiate this view. ...

One such plan, in which the appellant had in prior years deposited $2,000 and had in the interim augmented to $2,113.50, was referred to by the Company as the “B & M fund”. In November 1974 the appellant instructed the Company to transfer from his B & M plan the amount of $2,113.50 and open a similar plan for him in its "guaranteed fund”. ... Counsel for the respondent argued that the law was clear and that the proceeds of the termination of the B & M fund must be included in income. ...

Some time in 1969, T & T Agencies Limited, owned and operated by one Harlen Thompson of Kindersley, Saskatchewan, being in the business of real estate insurance, income tax consulting, travel agency and sale of motor licences, approached Kjeldsli with a view to selling to him all the business of T & T Agencies Limited. ... Accordingly, after some consultation or negotiation between Kjeldsli and Thompson of T & T Agencies Limited with the appellant participating on at least one occasion, an agreement was entered into by Kjeldsli and T & T Agencies which was filed as Exhibit A-1 and which reads as follows: AGREEMENT MADE IN DUPLICATE THIS 31st DAY OF OCTOBER, A D 1969 BETWEEN: T & T AGENCIES LIMITED, a body corporate carrying on business in the Province of Saskatchewan, hereinafter called the Vendor of the First part. ... On October 31, 1969, T & T Agencies Ltd entered into an agreement with John Iver Kjeldsli pursuant to which T & T Agencies Ltd sold to Kjeldsli for $20,000 its insurance and tax consulting business. ...

Morenish owned 49.9% of the shares of Y & R Properties Limited (hereinafter referred to as “Y & R”) and 73.5% of the shares of Imperial General Properties Limited. Kashel owned.65% of the shares of Y & R. On April 30, 1974, Kashel owned no shares in Y & R but the interest of Morenish in Y & R had increased to 52.37%. 4. ... They are Heap & Partners (Nfld) Ltd v MNR, 66 DTC 772 and Frappier v Her Majesty the Queen, 76 DTC 6066. ...

In two recent cases before the Tax Review Board — and Estate of Hyman Kamichik v MNR, [1973] CTC 2208; 73 DTC 177— Estate of Denzil Olaf MacNeill v MNR, [1973] CTC 2248; 73 DTC 189, Judge Flanigan, then Chairman of the Tax Review Board, held that an encroachment clause for the benefit of children must impose more than a moral obligation to do what a natural parent would do for his children. ... In the case at bar, the words used — “for the advancement, maintenance, education or benefit of any infant” — are little more than a suggestion to look after the children in a natural way, and cannot be considered to deprive the widow of a tax benefit simply because they happened to be used in the will. ...