Search - 江西农大 毛瑢

Counsel for the respondent cited the following cases: Federal Farms Limited v MNR, [1959] CTC 98; 59 DTC 1050; Fleck Manufacturing (1959) Ltd v MNR, 30 Tax ABC 265; 62 DTC 580; MNR v Bonaventure Investment Co Ltd, [1962] CTC 160; 62 DTC 1083; David Miller v MNR, [1962] CTC 488; 62 DTC 1303; MNR v Couture, [1965] CTC 54; 65 DTC 5031; A Janin & Cie Ltée v MNR, [1968] Tax ABC 864; 68 DTC 534; [1971] CTC 158; 71 DTC 5116; [1973] CTC 354; 73 DTC 5267; Courrier MH Inc v The Queen, [1976] CTC 567; 76 DTC 6331; The Queen v Transcontinental Timber Co Ltd, [1979] CTC 203; 79 DTC 5147; Imperial Oil Ltd v MNR, [1947] CTC 353; (1946-48) DTC 1090; Domenic Cirella v The Queen, [1978] CTC 1; 77 DTC 5442. ... (McGregor on Damages, 13th Ed (London: Sweet & Maxwell Limited, 1972) at pp 661 and 664). ...

He stated that the Parkway had been established in 1971 — the sewers, the zoning for the area, etc. ... Counsel did not say that I should compare Mr Murphy’s qualifications with Mr Fraser’s, but rather he said — contrast them. ... Counsel continued that he was not even a valuator in 1971 — the year for which he was valuing the property. ...

The English version reads “.. computed by reference to time actually spent by the employee travelling away...”. ... Therefore, the amount of the allowance is excluded from income. ”, the allowance received by the appellant should have been excluded from income because the allowance of $0.165 is reasonable in the sense that it is not excessive. ... In short, it would be sufficient to change, for example, the wording to... computed by reference to distance covered or time actually spent...” and in the French version, “... calculées en fonction de la distance parcourue ou du temps passé à voyager à l’extérieur...”. ...

It had a logo of “T & C”. By this time (early 1970) Gauthier, who had joined the agency business after it started, was an equal partner with Legere. ... He stressed the name T & C and Town and Country as important factors. ... At 152 and 1101 respectively he states as follows: But the value of the goodwill of a business is what a purchaser would be willing to give for the chance of being able to keep the connection of which it consists: vide Austen v Boys (1858), 11 De G & J 626 at 635; Lindley on Partnership, 10th Edition, page 523. ...

For the respondent: — During its period of ownership, Grantaun made no additions to the property, nor did it apply to have the property rezoned commercial or industrial. — During its period of ownership, Grantaun received gross rental income in the amount of $377 in respect of the property. ... On the second element referred to immediately above (other factors), the Board makes particular reference to the following: — The plans or projections for the use of the property were vaguest in the extreme. ... That responsibility is not discharged simply by the selection of one of the possibilities which could have existed, and classifying it as the major or sole possibility for the transaction. — The lack of any evidence that the appellant could have contributed her own share of the property development expense (whatever develpment that might be), let alone that she could have assumed the financial burden for the total project if necessary (see Me/crete Construction Company Limited v Her Majesty The Queen, [1977] CTC 273; 77 DTC 5181, and Trans Canada Holdings Limited v MNR, [1980] CTC 2791; 80 DTC 1689). ...

The amounts of income at issue were: Year Jeremy Cole Trust Seth Leonard Cole Trust 1972 $ 7,839 $4,614.08 1973 12,299 5,026.06 1974 7,489 6,041 In assessing, the respondent relied, inter alia, upon subsections 104(6), 104(13), 104(18) and 104(24) of the Income Tax Act, SC 1970-71-72, 63, as amended. ... It was determined by the trustees to make the income payable for the benefit of the beneficiary, and this obligation would be recognized as and when required by the parents of the infant beneficiary. — Promissory notes were not prepared, but T-3’s were issued on behalf of the trustees indicating that all of the income of the trust was payable to the beneficiary. ... PERLMUTTER, OREN- STEIN, GIDDENS, NEWMAN & CO, with respect to the income tax treatment of continued accumulation of income in the trust fund as opposed to making the income available for and payable to or for the benefit of SETH COLE. ...

Mr Lux, who had been a real estate salesman for Kelly & Kraag, was Stated to have been employed by the appellant company as well as by other related companies. ... Subsequently, he acted as a real estate broker in the firm of Kelly & Kraag in which, for a time, he was the sole shareholder. ... The wording of the agreement of purchase and sale and the extensions to the closing date of that agreement (Exhibit A-2, R-1 & R-2) are in keeping with the appellant’s intention of building townhouses. ...

In his written submissions, counsel for the appellant summarized the facts as follows: 4.0 Banron has sold to Ranches 4.1 “all the current assets and sundry investments and assume... as more particularly set out in schedule A hereto” (article 1 of Exhibit A-1) and 4.2 “all accounts receivable, book debts and other debts due or accruing to the vendor in connection with the said business and the full bentfit of all securities for such accounts or debts” (article 4 of Exhibit A-1). 5.0 Schedule A lists the following debt: “due from The Banister Corporation — $736,720.43”. ... STATEMENT OF REASONS 15.0 Section 17(1) is not applicable since there was “an interest at a reasonable rate” stipulated on the debt, this is 5%. 16.0 There was an absolute assignment made in accordance with the provisions of section 34(15) of The Judicature Act of Alberta and the debtor, The Banister, has been informed of the said assignment, has consented to it, the best evidence being the full payment of its debt due to Ranches. 17.0 The question of “absolute assignment” has been decided in the cases of Canadian Terrazzo & Marble Co Ltd vs B Kaplan Construction Co Ltd and La Banque Provinciale du Canada, 1966 CS 505, Charles Guay vs J E Lecours (1908) RP 89, Dessureault Inc vs Dame Bastien 1960 BR 1052, 1962 RCS 97, United Trailer Co Ltd vs MNR, 1961 DTC 1162 and Bank of Nova Scotia vs Leblanc & Al., 1954 DLR 579. 18.0 In the tax case of United Trailer Co Ltd, there was an absolute assignment of the conditional sales contract to a finance company and the appellant’s status passed from that of creditor to that of the finance company’s warrantor, the appellant’s customers became contractual debtors of the finance company and there was no debt owing to the appellant or amounts receivable by the appellant in respect of which a reserve could be claimed. The Honourable Justice Dumoulin refers in this case to Bank of Nova Scotia vs Leblanc & Al. and reaches the conclusion that there was an absolute assignment. 19.0 Based upon the above jurisprudence, we believe, Mr President, that you cannot arrive at another conclusion than to decide that there was an absolute assignment of debt by Banron to Ranches, that all moneys became due to Ranches, that Banron not being any more a creditor, could not have been the lender who would have included in his income the accrued interests, since the accrued interests were payable to the new creditor, Ranches. 20.0 The respondent may invoke the fact that no notice in writing of the assignor to the debtor has been filed as evidence, but the purpose of this notice is to keep informed the debtor of his new creditor, Ranches, who has been subrogated in the rights of his old creditor, Banron, and the appellant has produced plenty of evidence ito that effect: ali parties concerned were acting through the same persons or representants, the appellant and A J Cressey, the financial statements, the minutes, the payment by preferred shares, etc. ...

In June 1973 a plan was prepared by the firm Bouchard & Deraspe, at a cost of $545.78 (Exhibit A-10). ... Muzly Lawee & Naima E Lawee v MNR, [1971] Tax ABC 232; 71 DTC 179; (20. MNR v Muzly Lawee & Naima E Lawee, [1972] CTC 359; 72 DTC 6342; 21. ...

In Cassidy v MNR, Somerwell, LJ, referred to this matter, and instanced, as did Denning, LJ, in the later case of Stevenson, Jordon & Harrison, Ltd v MacDonald & Evans, that clearly superintendence and control cannot be the decision test when one is dealing with a professional man, or a man of some particular skill and experience. ...