Search - 江西农大 毛瑢

.), or a reasonable amount in respect thereof, whichever i is the lesser; The respondent has disallowed the deduction of four-sevenths of the amount of such interest for each of the years in question on the ground that $400,000 out of the $700,000 borrowed by the bond issue was used to redeem preferred shares and was not, therefore, used "‘for the purpose of earning income’ ‘ from the business. ... Surely, what must have been intended by Section 11(1)(c) was that the interest should be deductible for the years in which the borrowed capital was employed in the business rather than that it should be deductible for the life of a loan as long as its first use was in the business.* [5] The facts of the present appeal provide an even more striking illustration of the inappropriateness of the meaning of the words money used for the purpose of earning income from a business ’ ’ that is relied on by the respondent. ...

About July 23, 1948, and upon completion of the last of these voyages, the ‘‘ Mont Sorrel’’ went into dry-dock and underwent a survey. ... These subsections are as follows: “12. (1) In computing income, no deduction shall be made in respect of (a) an outlay or expense except to the extent that it was made or incurred by the taxpayer for the purpose of gaining or producing income from property or a business of the taxpayer, (b) an outlay, loss or replacement of capital, a payment on account of capital or an allowance in respect of depreciation, obsolescence or depletion except as expressly permitted by this Part. ’ ’ It is of particular importance to note that neither of the vessels, following completion of the repairs, was used in the business of the appellant, and that at the time the expenses were incurred the appellant had entered into agreements to dispose of the vessels and knew that thereafter they would not be used to earn income for the appellant. ...

The following sections of The Income Tax Act were applicable to each of the years 1952 and 1953. ‘ 3. ... Subject to the other provisions of this Part, income for a taxation year from a business or property is the profit therefrom for the year. 127. (1) In this Act, (e) “business” includes a profession, calling, trade, manufacture or undertaking of any kind whatsoever and includes an adventure or concern in the nature of trade but does not include an office or employment; ’ ’ Although the Minister is the appellant in this case, the onus of proving the assessment to be erroneous is on the respondent (M.N.R. v. ...

Subject to the other provisions of this Part, income for a taxation year from a business or property is the profit therefrom for the year. 139. (1) In this Act, (e) ‘business’ includes a profession, calling, trade, manufacture or undertaking of any kind whatsoever and includes an adventure or concern in the nature of trade but does not include an office or employment; ’ ’ The material facts may be stated as follows: Respondent, who lives in Sarnia, Ontario, had been engaged in the business of grocer and meat merchant. ... From his notice of appeal to the Income Tax Appeal Board, dated September 27, 1954, I quote the following: “The appellant’s venture in purchasing the said lots was a speculation. ’’ It was very strongly argued by Mr. ...

Section 3, the charging section of the Act, read as follows: i ‘ 3. In addition to any other tax or duty payable under any other Act, there shall be assessed, levied and paid upon the annual profits or upon the annual excess profits, as the case may be, of every person residing or ordinarily resident in Canada, or who is carrying on business in Canada, a tax as provided for in the First Part of the Second Schedule to this Act, or a tax as provided for in the Second Part of the said Schedule, whichever tax is the greater.” ... It is plain that what was brought into charge for tax under the Act was ‘‘annual profits’’ or “annual excess profits’’ and the term ‘‘profits’’ in the case of a corporation was defined by Section 2(f) the relevant portion of which read as follows: “2. (1) In this Act and in any regulations made under this Act, unless the context otherwise requires, the expression,— (f) ‘profits’ in the case of a corporation or joint stock company for any taxation period means the amount of net taxable income of the said corporation or joint stock company as determined under the provisions of the Income War Tax Act in respect of the same taxation period; ’ ’ On these enactments counsel for the appellant contended simply that since the appellant’s income was exempt from corporation tax under Section 89 of the Income War Tax Act it had no taxable income as determined under the provisions of the Income War Tax Act and, consequently, no ‘‘profits’’ within the meaning of Section 2(f) of The Excess Profits Tax Act, 1940, that could be brought into charge for excess profits tax under Section 3 of the latter Act. ...

., Mixermobile $ 880.00 $281.60 July 1947 Huggard Equipment; Dragline 1280.72 384.21 Oct. 1947 S. ... From these presumptions it is not allowable to depart where the language admits of no other meaning. ’ ’ Moreover, a reading of the context and the other provisions in the statute indicates that Parliament intended the section to mean what it says. ...

Ladore to be his executors, and after providing for payment of his debts, funeral and testamentary expenses, he made provision for his widow, the appellant herein, as follows: " " 3. ... In that case Findlay, J., said at p. 439: " 4 If the capital belonged to the person receiving the sums— if he or she was beneficially entitled not only to the income but to the capital—then I should think that, when the payments were made, they ought to be regarded, and would be regarded, as payments out of capital, but where there is a right to the income, but the capital belongs to somebody else, then, if payments out of capital are made and made in such a form that they come into the hands of the beneficiaries as income, it seems to me that they are income and not the less income, because the source from which they came was—in the hands, not of the person receiving them, but in the hands of somebody else—capital.” ...

Edouard Gagnon leur subrogé-tuteur. ’ ’ L’article premier statue que: ‘‘ Le partage des biens de la succession de J. ... (a) ventes supprimées — $23,702.42 (b) escompte supprimé 6,668.18 (c) achats et dépenses fictifs 24,892.38” Il est encore allégué par l’appelant que l’intimé, héritier ab intestat de feu J. Ulysse Ste-Marie, ‘‘... s’est rendu coupable de mauvaise représentation et fraude en faisant défaut de déclarer dans son rapport pour l’année d’imposition 1956 les revenus supprimés par la succession J. ...

The only sale effected in 1956 occurred on May 25, when madame Thibeault sold to Coté & Lavigueur Construction Ltée practically all the remainder of the property, amounting to 426,781 sq. ft., for a reported price of $55,000, and, on the profit, was originally re-assessed by the Minister at $27,394.35 (Ex. ... Henri Lavigueur, an officer of Côté & Lavigueur Construction Ltée, testified that his company, for a long time, had been looking for a suitable land on which to build and that the instant property was found as a result of his company’s efforts. ... The efforts made by a woman who lacked business experience to carry out her original intention is in contrast to the ‘ ‘ do little or nothing ’ ’ attitude of the taxpayer in the Day ease, wherein he had more skill, ability and freedom than the respondent to dispose of his property in a manner which best suited his purpose. ...

Mathers — President and Director Evatt R. Mathers — Vice-President and Director George D. ... Mathers 2 — Evatt R. Mathers 1 — George D. Webb 1 — G. Tidgwell 1 —- P. ... Mathers & Son Limited”’. ...