Search - consideration

Expense- Contract or Option Cancellation payment for surrender of key lease was capital In finding that lump sums paid by a colliery company in order to secure a reduction in the scope of (in one case) or the cancellation (in the other case) of two mining leases (and thereby release its liability to restore the surface) were on capital account, Lawrence L.J. first noted (at p. 787) that the company's trade did not consist of acquiring mining leases and selling those mining leases but, rather, of the winning and selling of coal, and then stated (at p. 788): "... it cannot, in my opinion, reasonably be said that the consideration paid for and the acceptance of the surrender was a sum wholly and exclusively expended for the purpose of winning and selling the coal in which the Company traded. ...

.)-- summary under Nature of Income Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 9- Nature of Income amounts received were revenue notwithstanding on-payment obligation The taxpayer, which was the co-owner along with Dome Petroleum of the operating rights to certain mineral properties, agreed to pay a percentage of the net proceeds of production from the taxpayer's working interest to Dome Petroleum in consideration for Dome Petroleum's services as operator. ...

Expense- Restrictive Covenants Following competition among the major U.K. oil companies to have service stations distribute the companies' products on an exclusive basis, the taxpayer began entering into arrangements under which it would lease the service station from the owner for a period of up to 20 years in consideration for a nominal annual rent and a lump sum payment paid at the inception of the lease. ...

Expense- Restrictive Covenants purpose of inducement for 5-year agency agreement was increasing sales The taxpayer, along with other oil companies, paid lump sums to service station owners in consideration for the owners' agreement to deal exclusively with the oil companies for a fixed number of years (generally, five years, but ranging up to 20 years). ...

Davies J stated (at para. 143): [T]he CRA and MNR effectively approbated and reprobated the same conduct by the Appellant and thereby reached inconsistent decisions by failing to apply the same considerations and deemed facts to both applications. ...

Bisson, 72 DTC 6374 (FCTD)-- summary under Subsection 15(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 15- Subsection 15(1) The taxpayer, who was the general manager and one of the two principal shareholders of a bus company ("Hull City Transport") agreed, in settlement of a dispute with the other principal shareholder ("Thorn"), to purchase the beneficial ownership of the shares of Thorn in consideration for annual payments of $3,000 for four years, and $5,000 per year thereafter until the sum of $60,000 had been fully paid. ...

"The premiums are part of the consideration given by the borrowers for the use of the capital lent to them, and part of 'the creditor's share of the profit which the borrower... is presumed to make from the use of the money'. ...

Profit- Patents and Know-How The taxpayer, which was incorporated for the purpose of exploiting a patent for stainless steel which (by the time of the appeal to the Commissioners) had been granted to it in 28 countries, was found to have realized capital receipts when it transferred its American patent rights to an American subsidiary in consideration for shares, and sold the Japanese patent rights to a Japanese company for £25,000 payable in cash instalments (plus an annual royalty of £1,000, which it acknowledged to be taxable). ...

He concluded (at para. 38) that "the system of submission of claims does not constitute an ‘invoice'…[and] the moment when the consideration for the taxable supply becomes due is the moment when the manufacturer approves the claim. ...

Thorn EMI plc, [1987] DTC 462 (CA)-- summary under Property Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 248- Subsection 248(1)- Property A lump sum which the taxpayer (a British holding company) received as consideration for a non-competition agreement given by it to the U.S. purchaser of three operating companies indirectly owned by it was found to be a capital gain pursuant to s. 22(3) of the Finance Act 1965 which provided that: "There is... a disposal of assets by their owner where any capital sum is derived from assets notwithstanding that no asset is acquired by the person paying the capital sum.... ...