Search - connection
Results 491 - 500 of 534 for connection
FCA
Canadian Industries Ltd. v. The Queen, 80 DTC 6163, [1980] CTC 222 (FCA)
By letter dated August 9, 1967 CIL and Chematur agreed concerning the distribution of this sum as follows: We wish to refer to the agreement between our companies, dated 27th June, 1960, concerning our purchase of rights under your continuous TNT process, and our recent correspondence in connection with our sale of rights under such process to the United States Government. ...
FCA
The Queen v. Littler, 78 DTC 6179, [1978] CTC 235 (FCA)
Two English decisions are worth noting in this connection. Firstly, there is the case of Mersey Docks and Harbour Board v Proctor, [1923] AC 253 at 258-9. ...
FCA
Canada v. General Electric Capital Canada Inc., 2011 DTC 5011 [at at 5558], 2010 FCA 344
What it shows is that the Tax Court Judge became overly concerned about an issue that had no substantial connection with the outcome ...
FCA
Weeks v. Canada, 2001 DTC 5035 (FCA)
In other words, without knowing what costs a family would bear for institutional care, there is no factual foundation for the conclusion that there is a causal connection between the quantum of tax relief for disability- related costs of home care and the choice between home care and institutional care. ...
FCA
Novopharm Ltd. v. Canada, 2003 DTC 5195, 2003 FCA 112
Fogler, Rubinoff, $75,549.84 for their services in connection with these transactions. ...
FCA
Barnabe Estate v. Minister of National Revenue, 99 DTC 5387, [1999] 4 CTC 5 (FCA)
In this connection, I refer to the remarks made by Major J., when rendering the unanimous judgment of the Supreme Court in Mitsui & Co. ...
FCA
Water's Edge Village Estates (Phase II) Ltd. v. Canada, 2002 DTC 7172, 2002 FCA 291
(In this connection, the Tax Court Judge appears to have overlooked that a profit would have resulted in the absence of the depreciation charge which was an optional deduction.) [24] The Supreme Court has now held that the reasonable expectation of profit test is not a relevant consideration in determining the existence (or continued existence) of a business where the activity in question is commercial-like and cannot be viewed as a personal pursuit (Stewart, supra at paragraph 47). ...
FCA
Canada v. Agnico-Eagle Mines Limited, 2016 FCA 130
When the Directors of the Taxpayer passed the Value of Consideration for Share Issuance Resolution, it appears that they were complying with subsection 23(4) of the OBCA, which reads as follows: Value determined by directors Fixation de la valeur par les administrateurs 23. (4) The directors shall, in connection with the issue of any share not issued for money, determine, 23. (4) Lors de l’émission d’une action contre un apport autre qu’en numéraire, les administrateurs établissent: (a) the amount of money the corporation would have received if the share had been issued for money; and a) le montant que la société aurait reçu si l’action avait été émise contre un apport en numéraire; (b) either, b) et, selon le cas: (i) the fair value of the property or past service in consideration of which the share is issued, or (i) la juste valeur des biens ou du service rendu qui sert d’apport, (ii) that such property or past service has a fair value that is not less than the amount of money referred to in clause (a). ...
FCA
Canada (Attorney General) v. Mckinnon, docket A-421-98
" His reason for so concluding was that the liability created by subsection 227.1(1) was not absolute and if, through their personal conduct in connection with the company's failure to remit, the directors had exercised the degree of care, diligence and skill required to satisfy subsection 227.1(3), they were exempted from liability. [48] Couture C.J.T.C.C. appears to have approached subsection 227.1(3) by asking whether the taxpayers had, in a broad sense, acted honestly and responsibly when faced with a difficult situation, and when the assignment to the bank of their accounts receivable had further restricted their ability to remit source deductions. ...
FCA
GlaxoSmithKline Inc. v. Canada, 2010 FCA 201
It is in that context that the Supreme Court held that other transactions entered into by the taxpayer in connection with the borrowing of funds were not relevant in determining the use to which the borrowed funds were put ...