Search - consideration

It is further agreed that, as of the date of transfer, the aggregate cash surrender value of the six policies was $29,330.09; and the Crown further concedes for purposes of this appeal that payment by the recipient of the cash surrender value of a transferred life insurance policy can constitute adequate consideration for that transfer. 4 In this case, Mrs Whittall gave her late husband a demand promissory note in his favour in the sum of $29,330.09 payable without interest at the rate of $4,000 per year. 5 On March 21, 1964 the six policies in question were transferred by Mrs Whittall to M M Estates Ltd, a British Columbia private corporation, in which at all material times all issued shares were held by Mrs Whittall and members of her family, excluding the deceased who was not at any time a shareholder of the company. ... The appellants, however, rely on the concluding unnumbered provision of subsection 2(2) of the Act, which reads: but nothing herein contained shall render liable for duty any property bona fide transferred for a consideration that is of a value substantially equivalent to the property transferred. 10 The appellants contend that during the deceased's lifetime he agreed to transfer and did transfer these policies to his wife, that he received consideration for this transfer in the form of a demand promissory note, that this note was for a sum “substantially equivalent” to he value of the transferred policies, and that accordingly the insurance proceeds are specifically excluded from the deceased's estate under the above provision. ... The deceased received no consideration for this transfer. 14 In my opinion, that language is entirely appropriate to the situation before me. ...

By crediting the GST payable account $7.00, we recognized that the consideration for the sale was $100.00 and the tax liability of $7.00 was established based on that consideration. ... The GST applies to the amount of consideration shown on the invoice without regard to the discount. ... These sections are important because the 7% GST is based on "the value of the consideration for the supply". ...

Pennycuick said, in effect, that a consideration other than services could only be shown if the consideration, other than services, moving from the employee for the benefit received demonstrably represented full value in money or money’s worth for the benefit in question. ... "n it by means of the procedure set down in the company’s polic. regulations and comply with its conditions; (iii) nor can it be said that the payment received by the appellant was ‘‘in consideration or partial consideration for covenant with reference to what the officer or employee is, or is not, to do before or after the termination of the employment’’. ... That the payment is made for no consideration in the legal sense, should not (as pointed out by Jenkins, L.J. in Jennings v. ...

The total consideration which the respondent received for becoming liable on a guarantee for $62,500 was 250 shares in the company, one-quarter of the gross royalty of two and one-half per cent and three-quarters of one Net Royalty Trust Unit. This consideration was treated as income on a valuation of $4,500 by the Minister of National Revenue and taxed accordingly. ... They are in no way analogous to the consideration received in 1951 as the respondent’s remuneration for the guarantee, which I have characterized as a deferred loan. ...

In the latter part of 1972 for economic reasons the contracts were terminated by mutual agreement, the appellant later receiving the $95,000 in question as consideration for releasing the licencees from further performance of the licencing contracts. ... It appears to us, as well, that the contract for termination of the licences was also a contract made in the course of the appellant’s licencing operations and that the $95,000 received as the consideration for the termination of the licences and thus of the rights of the appellant to the stumpage fees remaining to be paid under them were also revenue receipts of the business just as the remaining stumpage payments would have been had they been made. ... The changing or terminating of the contracts was also in the course of the appellant’s business and the consideration for the change took the place of stumpage payments to be received under them. ...

.), Strayer J.A. restated, at paragraph 4, the principal considerations for determining whether an extension of time should be granted: The main considerations for determining whether an extension of time should be granted are well established in this Court [see e.g. ... C.A.), at page 5122, Pratte J.A. stated: The court may intervene and set aside the discretionary decision under review only if that decision was made in bad faith, if its author clearly ignored some relevant facts or took into consideration irrelevant facts or if the decision is contrary to law. ...

Dans un cas où le paragraphe 178(2) de la Loi de l’impôt sur le revenu s’applique, ni le fait que le montant en litige dans l’appel ait été minime, ni le fait que l’appel n’ait soulevé aucune question de principe ne me semblent devoir être pris en considération lorsqu'il s’agit de fixer le montant des frais raisonnables auxquels a droit le contribuable. ... Les considérations pertinentes à la détermination du montant des frais auxquels un contribuable a droit en vertu du paragraphe 178(2) me semblent ressortir du passage de la décision rendue dans La Reine c Creamer, [1977] 2 CF 195 à la page 206; [1977] CTC 77; 77 DTC 5025 où le juge Mahoney dit quel résultat le Parlement a voulu atteindre lorsque cette disposition s’applique: Parliament intended that, when so sued, the taxpayer be able to defend himself, as he may be competently advised, undeterred by the expense involved, so long as it is reasonably and properly incurred. While the taxpayer is not to be deterred by financial considerations from undertaking his defence, he is not being given a licence to squander public funds in a frivolous or luxurious manner, nor are those whom he retains. ...

Penalties and interest are also under appeal but they turn on the main issue. [2]            The Appellant contends that during the period he was a small supplier who was not a registrant and that by virtue of section 166 of the Act he was not required to collect and remit GST on taxable supplies. [3]            Section 166 of the Act provides where a person makes a taxable supply other than a supply of real property by way of sale, and the consideration or a part thereof for the supply becomes due, or is paid before it becomes due at a time when the person is a small supplier who is not a registrant, that consideration or part thereof, as the case may be, shall not be included in calculating the tax payable in respect of the supply. [4]            To succeed the Appellant must meet two conditions; first he must not have been a registrant. ... The Appellant's vague general statements regarding the consideration which he earned just won't do. ...

BETWEEN: NORMAN GAUDREAU Appellant and HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN Respondent REASONS FOR JUDGMENT OF THE COURT (Delivered from the Bench at Ottawa, Ontario, on November 16, 2005) NOËL J.A. [1]                The principal argument raised in support of this appeal is that the Tax Court Judge considered the appellant's intention to return to Canada after the expiration of his four-year contract in Egypt as the overriding consideration in the determination that he was resident in Canada during this four-year period. [2]                We do not read the reasons of the Tax Court Judge as the appellant does. ... However, nothing turns on this as the Tax Court Judge acknowledged that the appellant was a dual resident and proceeded to render judgment on that basis. [5]                The appellant's second argument is that the Judge incorrectly applied the first tie-breaker rule (centre of vital interests) in the Canada-Egypt Income Tax Convention Act, 1984, being Part IV of S.C. 1984, c. 35. [6]                The appellant submits that the Judge took into account economic considerations, but failed to take into account personal considerations. ...

Motion disposed of on consideration of written representations Before: The Honourable Justice Gabrielle St-Hilaire Appearances:   Agent for the Appellant: Asad Yakob Counsel for the Respondent: Rini Rashid   ORDER   Whereas the Appellant brought a motion seeking an Order permitting him to be represented in his general procedure appeal by his accountant, Asad Yakob;   And whereas the Respondent opposes the motion;   And whereas the Appellant has requested that the motion be disposed of upon consideration of written representations and without appearance by the parties;   Upon consideration of the Appellant’s pleadings in his notice of motion and of the Respondent’s written representations;   It is ordered that the application be dismissed, without costs. ...