Search - consideration

Filter by Type:

Results 3301 - 3310 of 11353 for consideration
TCC

Treefield Holdings Limited, Burning Elm Holdings Limited and Bay Leaf Holdings Limited v. Minister of National Revenue, [1990] 1 CTC 2023, 89 DTC 694

Further consideration was given to the proposals and in particular three principal areas of concern were addressed: the provision of an appropriate buy/sell agreement; the need for flexibility in estate planning for Clement and Cutler and tax implications both favourable and unfavourable. ... I am satisfied that carrying on business in the most effective manner is but one factor or element to be weighed in my consideration of whether the small business deduction was one of the main reasons for the existence of the partnership. ... Furthermore, he maintained that none of the considerations pertained to or related to the provisions of the Act dealing with small business deductions. ...
BCSC decision

Constantine Kourtessis and Hellenic Import-Export Company Limited v. Minister of National Revenue and Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, [1989] 1 CTC 56, 89 DTC 5214

Any consideration of costs will be deferred until the ultimate outcome is known or until further order. ... Other forms of relief to eliminate the alleged disparity in treatment were not proposed and consideration of them at this stage would be premature. ... The other federal statute there under consideration was the Bankruptcy Act. ...
FCTD

1594418 Ontario Inc. v Canada (National Revenue), 2021 FC 157

While it may be fair to assume that most taxpayers launch challenges to their income taxes seeking to pay less, the fact that the Applicant here has attempted to file returns to lower its taxes owing for the relevant years is not a determinative consideration regarding the question of jurisdiction. [27] Viewing the claim holistically and practically, and seeking a realistic appreciation of its essential character without fixating on matters of form (JP Morgan at para 50), the core of the Applicant’s complaint is that the Minister refused to examine its returns without an adequate explanation. ... The Respondent therefore seeks its costs in accordance with the mid-level of Column III of Tariff B, pursuant to Rule 407 of the Federal Court Rules, SOR/98-106. [60] Costs are in the discretion of the Court pursuant to Rule 400, which sets out a number of considerations, including the results achieved and the importance and complexity of the issues. ... While these may both be relevant considerations, their impact is reduced given the outcome of the proceeding. ...
TCC

L.B. Farms Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1988] 1 CTC 2325, 88 DTC 1215

In the context of this particular appeal the extensive and long-standing land acquisition program carried on by the City also plays a major role, since the concept of highest and best use clearly involves a consideration of the length of time that a prudent, informed investor would reasonably be expected to hold a property for future development. ... Only evidence of facts occurring after December 31,1971 which were at that time reasonably predictable and likely to have been considered by an objective purchaser or seller should be taken into consideration. ... Taking all of the evidence into consideration I find the value of the subject properties to be $600 per acre. ...
TCC

McCutcheon Farms Ltd. v. Minister of National Revenue, [1988] 1 CTC 2349, 88 DTC 1208

In general terms the issue under consideration in these cases was whether particular income was income from property used principally for the purpose of producing income from the primary business. ... But this consideration is irrelevant to our inquiry. The test is not whether the taxpayer was forced to use a particular property to do business; the test is whether the property was used to fulfil a requirement which had to be met in order to do business. ... I am satisfied that the facts under consideration do not place the relevant property within it. ...
TCC

Heather Barnard v. Minister of National Revenue, [1985] 1 CTC 2178, 85 DTC 210

In Oil Investments Ltd v MNR, 3 Tax ABC 141; 50 DTC 479, the Income Tax Appeal Board gave consideration to the meaning of the word “allowances” in subsection 3(4) of the Income War Tax Act which provides that any payment made to any person in connection with any employment or allowances on a per diem or other periodic basis shall, subject to certain specified exemptions, be salary of such person and taxable as income. ... I adopt as a correct statement of the law regarding the meaning of the word “allowance”, in the context under consideration, this passage from Canadian Income Taxation, 3rd (1983) edition by Edwin C Harris at page 102: An “allowance” is a round amount given to an employee to cover expenses that he will incur, such as travel or entertainment, on his employer’s behalf. ... The statutory provision under consideration in these appeals was paragraph 60(b) of the Act which provides: 60. ...
TCC

John C Lillico v. Minister of National Revenue, [1984] CTC 2062, 84 DTC 1048

Mr Lillico accepted to pay the purchase price of $11,000, the amount suggested by Mr Pellerin, and prepared a short agreement of purchase and sale which was executed by Mr Pellerin and Mr Lillico; this agreement reads as follows: April 27, 1976 In consideration of $11,000 I sell, assign and transfer all my right, title and interest in my insurance files to John Lillico, 115 Canada Building, Prince Albert. ... It being understood and agreed that in consideration of the Purchaser having entered into this agreement and in consideration of the sum of One ($1.00) Dollar paid by the Purchaser to the Vendor, which payment is acknowledged, the Vendor agrees that it will not for a period of Ten (10) years from the date hereof, either directly or indirectly or as a partner, shareholder or in any way howsoever undertake the sale or be in any way involved in the general insurance business within a radius of Fifty (50) miles of the City of Prince Albert, Saskatchewan and that the Vendor will provide the Purchaser with an agreement and undertaking by its principal shareholder, Fred C Cluff that he will likewise not be engaged either directly or indirectly or as a Shareholder in any company or as a partner associate, salesman or advisor in the insurance business other than life insurance, in the City of Prince Albert, Saskatchewan or within Fifty (50) miles radius thereof for a period of Ten (10) years from the date hereof and in the event of the Vendor or the said Fred C Cluff breaching the covenants contained in this paragraph that the Vendor and the said Fred C Cluff or either of them will pay to the Purchaser such amount in damages as shall be assessed or found by a Court of competent jurisdiction to have been suffered by the purchaser. 10. ... In their view since these covenants were not enforceable no consideration was paid to either vendor for such covenant. ...
T Rev B decision

Gérard Bousquet v. Minister of National Revenue, [1983] CTC 2064, 83 DTC 60

The only question is whether the bearer bonds amounting to $170,000 found in safety deposit box No 320 should have been included in the appellant’s tax returns for the taxation years under consideration. ... In practice, none of these rules is ignored by the Board; however, their strict application is subject to the circumstances and considerations of each of the cases heard by the Board. ... On the other hand, counsel for the appellant, who has the burden of proof for the taxation years 1966 to 1970, not only did not produce the best evidence, but produced no valid evidence that Real Groleau was at any time during the period under consideration the owner of the said securities. ...
TCC

Spiegel v. R., [1997] 1 CTC 2587, 97 DTC 817

On December 31, 1985, Seatech issued 3,632,094 Class B 8% non- cumulative redeemable voting research and development preferred shares (“Class B Preferred Shares”) for a total consideration of $3,632,094. 7. On December 31, 1985, Seatech also issued 767,906 Class C 8% non- cumulative redeemable voting research and development preferred shares (“Class C Preferred Shares”) for a total consideration of $767,906. 8. ... It is evident from the breadth and scope of this Regulation that no consideration could have been given by the legislators to the consequences of the timing imposed by the combined operation of subsection 194(7) and this Regulation. ...
TCC

Bennett v. R., [1999] 3 CTC 2137, 99 DTC 938 (Informal Procedure)

Retirement savings plan is defined: “retirement savings plan” means (a) a contract between an individual and a person licensed or otherwise authorized under the laws of Canada or a province to carry on in Canada an annuities business, under which, in consideration of payment by the individual or the individual’s spouse of any periodic or other amount as consideration under the contract, a retirement income commencing at maturity is to be provided for the individual, or (b) an arrangement under which payment is made by an individual or the individual’s spouse (i) in trust to a corporation licensed or otherwise authorized under the laws of Canada or a province to carry on in Canada the business of offering to the public its services as trustee, of any periodic or other amount as a contribution under the trust, (ii) to a corporation approved by the Governor in Council for the purposes of this section that is licensed or otherwise authorized under the laws of Canada or a province to issue investment contracts providing for the payment to or to the credit of the holder thereof of a fixed or determinable amount at maturity, of any periodic or other amount as a contribution under such a contract between the individual and that corporation, or (iii) as a deposit with a branch or office, in Canada, of (A) a person who is, or is eligible to become, a member of the Canadian Payments Association, or (B) a credit union that is a shareholder or member of a body corporate referred to as a “central” for the purposes of the Canadian Payments Association Act, (in this section referred to as a “depositary”) to be used, invested or otherwise applied by that corporation or that depositary, as the case may be, for the purpose of providing for the individual, commencing at maturity, a retirement income. ... Retirement income fund is defined: “retirement income fund” means an arrangement between a carrier and an annuitant under which, in consideration for the transfer to the carrier of property, the carrier undertakes to pay to the annuitant and, where the annuitant so elects, to the annuitant’s spouse after the annuitant’s death, in each year that begins not later than the first calendar year after the year in which the arrangement was entered into one or more amounts the total of which is not less than the minimum amount under the arrangement for the year, but the amount of any such payment shall not exceed the value of the property held in connection with the arrangement immediately before the time of the payment. ... These factors should then be analyzed to determine what weight they should be given in identifying the location of the property, in light of three considerations: (1) the purpose of the exemption under the Indian Act; (2) the type of property in question; and (3) the nature of the taxation of that property. ...

Pages