Search - connection

In connection with the fact that the Appellant would carry a packed lunch on the train I refer to the following comment from the Circular: Amounts deductible for meals 8.          ... In connection with this argument, I refer to the comments by my colleague, Mr. ...

This exception only applies to the use of a vehicle in connection with employment. The use of the vehicle in this case was personal and was not in connection with employment. ...

Boucher in connection with the issue of the losses:   a.       the explanation offered by the Appellant about the cause of the losses was very confusing and still remains somewhat so in my mind, in spite of the Appellant’s claim that the losses resulted from a loan to, and the pledging of assets as collateral for the benefit of, Transport Rob-Lac Inc., his now bankrupt company; [10]   b.       ... Boucher) why it took so long to process his claim. [12]   In fact, even though a claim was indeed made to Revenue Canada before these two individuals met (a fact undisputed by the Respondent), I am convinced that the claim had no connection with a tax refund owed the Appellant. ...

The only issue is in connection with a taxable capital gain to which he was assessed as the result of the sale by him of a ten-acre parcel of land at Pemberton, British Columbia. ... Rodgers takes the position that he was not subject to tax in connection with this sale as he had his principal residence, in fact his only residence, there. [2]      However, the matter is not that simple, although only one fact is seriously disputed and that is a fact which, in the final analysis, I do not have to determine. ...

(e)       Supplies 1998 Overnight Travel Bag $38.52                    The Appellant testified that the travel bag was used by him in connection with his business. ... In this connection I quote a question that the Appellant asked Peter Martin: Q.         ...

However, the evidence of the Appellant and Balbir clearly indicates that the Appellant worked at the MacKenzie Property and the Webster Property in 2000. [25]     It should also be noted that Balbir testified that Waria paid $6,042.56 to the CCRA in connection with deductions for the Appellant. ... Balbir testified that an adjustment to the tax returns was made which removed one-half of the amount paid to the Appellant by Waria and transferred one-half of the wage to Balbir and his wife Preminderjeet in connection with the Webster Property. [26]     After considering all of the evidence I have accepted the testimony of the Appellant that she worked for Waria and for Balbir and Preminderjeet in the year 2000. ...

The Appellant said that the Company became insolvent in 1999, the shares of the Company are worthless and the Company cannot repay the money that the Appellant advanced to the Company. [9]      When the Appellant filed his income tax return for the 1999 taxation year he did not claim an Allowable Business Investment Loss ("ABIL") with respect to the losses suffered by him in connection with the loans that he made to the Company. [10]     When the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") issued a Notice of Assessment for the Appellant's 1999 taxation year the Appellant filed a Notice of Objection. In the Notice of Objection the Appellant maintained that he was entitled to claim an ABIL of at least $25,000.00 in connection with the loans and other advances that he made to the Company. ...

In the said Reassessments the Minister disallowed the amounts claimed by the Applicant in connection with his investment in the Partnership ... McNevin was advised by a tax lawyer that by virtue of the Supreme Court's decision in Stewart the likelihood of success by the Applicant in connection with his tax liability had greatly improved ...

Bellfield and his associate for fraud and uttering false documents in connection with their promotion of the limited partnerships. ... Michael Spivak is knowledgeable as to the many appeals that are pending in this Court in connection with Mr. ...

In 1997, the Appellant paid $6,936.16 to Adoption Options in connection with the adoption of the twin girls. [2]            When computing her income and her tax for 1997, the Appellant claimed a tax credit under section 118.2 of the Income Tax Act on the basis that the amount of $6,936.16 was a medical expense. ... The Appellant and her husband decided to avoid the five-year waiting period by attempting to adopt through Adoption Options. [6]            Exhibit A-1 is a document from Adoption Options showing the fees and disbursements paid by the Appellant and her husband in connection with adopting the twin girls. ...