Search - consideration

(g) of the Income Tax Act, as the consideration for the class 16 assets disposed of in the transaction. ... It is to be observed as well that the statutory rule applies only ‘where an amount can reasonably be regarded as being in part consideration for disposition of depreciable property of a taxpayer of a prescribed class and as being in part consideration for something else’’. ... In its income tax return for the year 1958 Klondike Helicopters Limited allotted an amount of $7,950 as the consideration for these other depreciable and expendable assets and computed its income on the basis of $42,050 having been the consideration for disposition of the class 16 assets. ...

The Court of Appeal held, however, that the amount of $20,000 was payable for a specific and clearly identified consideration. ... Viewed in this light and taking into consideration that this sum of $20,000 is to be paid in five annual instalments of $4,000, I am of the opinion that this item was properly awarded. ... In such a case the alimony or allowance cannot be a total fixed amount payable by instalments up to the amount of $20,000 over a period of five years as in the case at bar, as the consideration for alimony or an allowance is the need of the creditor, whereas here the consideration is the waiver of benefits resulting from the marriage contract. ...

There was an agreement with the city for the use of the large room in consideration of payment of the extra costs. ... "consideration" includes any amount that is payable for a supply by operation of law.            ... [54]     In the explanatory notes, this provision is explained as follows: The definition "consideration" is being added so as to remove any doubt that such amounts that clearly would be consideration for a supply if there were a contract, are treated as consideration for purposes of Part IX and Schedules V, VI and VII to the Act. ... The amount so required to be paid would be treated as consideration. In all cases, in order to be consideration, the amount must be payable "for a supply". ...

Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent     REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Toronto, Ontario, on October 28, 2008) [1]                Notwithstanding Counsel’s able arguments, we are not persuaded that the Tax Court Judge made any error that warrants our intervention when he found that all of the consideration received by the appellant from General Electric Canada Inc. was for the shares that were sold by the appellant, that the appellant did not give a non-competition covenant to General Electric Canada Inc. and that Mr. ... was engaged in the circumstances, even though he had concluded that all of the consideration received by the appellant was for the shares that it sold. ... In our view, paragraph 68(a) does not apply where the entire amount of consideration received or receivable by a taxpayer from a person can reasonably be regarded as consideration for the disposition of a particular property, as was the case in the instant circumstances ...

Does the respondent agree that the swim training does not constitute “consideration” (or at least represents “nominal” consideration) to the Company or Mr. ... Of interest to these appeals is when the CRA considers whether consideration flowing back to the donor constitutes “nominal consideration”. ... As such the interpretations regarding the meaning of gift and consideration (and in particular whether consideration is “nominal”) set out in IC 75-23 are relevant to this case.   ...

  [15]            Indeed, the underlying presumption of the assessments issued in 2002 and 2003 is that the amounts paid to the appellant constitute consideration or partial consideration for his covenant not to solicit the clients that were under his management (Reply to Notice of Appeal, para. 18(f)(i)). ... Accordingly, to succeed, the appellant needed to show that the amounts in question could not reasonably be considered as having been received in consideration or partial consideration for that covenant ...   [19]            I find therefore that the evidence adduced in the Tax Court of Canada does not rebut the Minister’s presumption that the amount in queston was paid out in consideration or partial consideration for the non-solicitation covenant and, as such, was taxable as employment income ...

Lemire, 2013 FCA 242. [21]         Alternatively, the appellant states that she provided consideration equal to the property’s fair market value, for its transfer. She states that the consideration given included her commitment to return to Mr.  ... Savard with respect to the property and any consideration given to Mr.  ...

Specific liabilities of MMPS were assumed by the Appellant in consideration for the transfer of MMPS assets with a fair market value equal to those liabilities. ... The Appellant says in the alternative that if either the declaration or the payment of a dividend does constitute a transfer of property, the Appellant provided MMPS with fair market value consideration for both the declaration and payment of the dividend. 11. ... The right to sue is consideration for payment of the dividend. Therefore consideration passes between the payee and the payor at the time of payment. ...

By way of a Management Agreement dated September 10, 1999 between the Corporation and LWM, the Corporation was engaged to provide management services to LWM which services were in fact provided by the Appellant. [8] The Appellant argues that the dividends were paid to him personally in order to retain his services and that the transfer of dividends was for consideration. ... Minister of National Revenue, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 770, the Supreme Court of Canada held that a dividend is related to shareholding and not to any other consideration the shareholder might have provided. ... The Queen, 2020 TCC 101. [14] On many occasions, this Court has rejected the argument that consideration may be given for dividends including in the context of section 160 of the Act (please refer to Côte v. ...

(a) from 1965 until August 1, 1969, Nick Fragis and Chris Smirnios each owned a one-half interest in and operated a restaurant and tavern business known as The Blue Danube Restaurant Tavern, in Hamilton, Ontario; (b) by Agreement dated April 21, 1969, Nick Fragis and Chris Smirnios agreed, inter alia, to sell their interests in The Blue Danube Restaurant and Tavern to Fraldo Restaurants Limited; (c) the said transaction was closed on August 2, 1969; (d) the consideration for the sale of The Blue Danube Restaurant and Tavern was $55,000; (e) no agreement was made between Nick Fragis and Chris Smirnios and Fraldo Restaurants Limited as to the allocation of the said $55,000 between consideration for the disposition of depreciable property of The Blue Danube Restaurant and Tavern, being property described in Class 8 of Schedule B to the Income Tax Regulations, and consideration for anything else. 4. ... In computing its income for the 1970 and subsequent taxation years, Fraldo Restaurants Limited allocated $50,000 of the said $55,000 as being consideration for the purchase of the above mentioned depreciable property. 9. The question in respect of which the Minister requests a determination is what part of the said $55,000 can reasonably be regarded as being the consideration for the disposition of the Class 8 depreciable property of The Blue Danube Restaurant and Tavern business and what part of the said $55,000 can reasonably be regarded as consideration for something else. 10. ...