Search - consideration

Results 1 - 10 of 31 for consideration
ONCA decision

City of Toronto v. Anne Frankland, [1938-39] CTC 299

It may be that this question of the construction of the statute, which the learned Judge had decided in favour of respondent is all that is open for us for consideration under this special case. ... It is not unreasonable to think that such humble and unremunerative businesses as these smaller rooming-houses were not under consideration when the business assessment to which they are subject was fixed at 25% of the assessed value of the premises. ... :—I confess when the argument of these appeals had concluded my conclusion was that they should be dismissed but further consideration and reading the reasoning and conclusion of my Lord the Chief Justice I find myself obliged to concur with him in allowing the appeals and without costs. ...
ONCA decision

Russell Industries Limited v. City of Toronto, [1940-41] CTC 237

Canada Cycle & Motor Co. has its own offices and manufacturing plant in the Town of Weston, and the shares that appellant holds in that company were acquired as the consideration, or part of the consideration, for the sale by appellant of that manufacturing business to Can. ... Appellant did not ask to be allowed to have the matter sent back for consideration of this question by the Board. ... With respect to appellant’s second contention, to which alone the Municipal Board gave consideration, the finding of the Municipal Board with respect to the carrying on of a business is that "Appellant Company was not carrying on a business within the meaning of s. 8 of the Assessment Act at the offices mentioned.’’ ...
ONCA decision

Falconbridge Nickel Mines Ltd. v. Min. of Rev. (Ont.), [1981] CTC 120 (Ont.C.A.)

Rather, it was a discretion which may be exercised only on proper principles, and only on the basis of such considerations as may properly be taken into account by the Minister in assessing the merits of a particular claim. ... To the extent that it can be argued on this basis that the right did not fully mature until the evidentiary requirements for its consideration by the Minister were met, I would be prepared to accept that it was an “accruing” right. ... In disposing of this appeal it is neither necessary nor desirable for this Court to attempt to spell out those principles and considerations. ...
ONCA decision

City of Toronto v. Famous Players Canadian Corporation Ltd., [1935-37] CTC 140

On the hearing, I was somewhat strongly impressed with the soundness of the claim of the City; but from an attentive consideration of the undoubted and admitted facts, I am now of the opinion that the decision of the Board is right; and I would dismiss the appeal with costs. ... It is clear on a consideration of the other provisions of The Assessment Act and of the history of the legislation which has now culminated in sec. 83(6) of The Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1927, c. 238, that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain an appeal from The Ontario Railway and Municipal Board on a question of fact and that the words "‘or any order of the Municipal Board ‘ ’ relate back and are to be read with the words "‘the construction of'', so that the appeal is given to this Court in respect to the construction only of any order of The Municipal Board. ...
ONCA decision

International Metal Industries LTD v. City of Toronto, [1940-41] CTC 102

‘The business of managing, controlling and operating subsidiary companies is not one mentioned in subsec. 8 of (The Assessment Act,’ but counsel for the appellant contended that such business, if any such business was in existence, would come under the heading of ‘any business not before in this section or in clause 1 ” especially mentioned. ’ Upon careful consideration of all of the evidence, the Board is unable to find that the appellant company is carrying on any business at the premises leased by it from its Canadian subsidiary at 101 Hanson Street, and finds as a fact that the appellant is not carrying on any business at the said premises within the meaning of sec. 8(1) (10) of ‘The Assessment Act’ and therefore is not liable to business assessment thereunder. ‛ The jurisdiction of this Court on appeal from the orders of the Ontario Municipal Board is limited to consideration of questions of law, and in my view the Board’s order in this case is founded upon the findings of fact which I have quoted founded on the evidence before it. ... Passing to the case at bar the Municipal Board after consideration and discussion of the material before it, and arguments submitted, said in part: ‘““The Board... has failed to see any evidence tending to establish the existence of any business of the appellant. ... Upon careful consideration of all of the evidence, the Board is unable to find that the appellant company is carrying on any business at the premises leased by it from its Canadian subsidiary at 101 Hanson Street, and finds as a fact that the appellant is not carrying on any business at the said premises within the meaning of sec. 8(1) (k) of ‘The Assessment Act’ and therefore is not liable to business assessment thereunder. ...
ONCA decision

Corporation of the City of Toronto v. Rogers-Majestic Corporation, Limited, [1942] CTC 239

Ltd. was incorporated and the respondent Company transferred to the Broadcasting Company certain capital assets including land, buildings and equipment used in eonnection with the operation of the broadcasting branch of the business, The respondent Company received as consideration for such transfer $200,000 in bonds of the Broadcasting Company as well as the entire issued capital stock. ... "The Broadcasting Company carried on the business of radio broadcasting thereafter (particularly in the year 1939 which is the year under consideration in this ease) operating radio station CFRB and was assessed for business assessment in respect of the premises occupied by it for this purpose at 37 Bloor St. ... The income assessed, and the subject of this appeal has its origin in bonds of $200,000 issued by the Broadcasting Corporation, hereafter referred to as B.C., and by it delivered to the respondent in consideration of the sale or transfer by that company to the B.C. if the lands, buildings and equipment formerly used by the respondent in connection with its business. ...
ONCA decision

In Re Steven Low, [1967] CTC 118, 67 DTC 5060

Gourlay under the authority given to him by the Minister, was clearly stated in the affidavit of John Edward Sheppard, a solicitor in the Taxation Division of the Department of National Revenue, who deposed as follows: Unless the inquiry referred to in the Notice of Motion is completed before the hearing of the said appeal to the Tax Appeal Board, the Department of National Revenue will not have been able to make the thorough investigation of the complex facts of the said appeal which is required for its preparation and for the consideration of the Minister’s position in the appeal. ...
ONCA decision

Bathville Corporation Limited Et Al. v. Robert D. Atkinson Et Al., [1964] CTC 577, 64 DTC 5330

In accordance with the principles therein laid down we must hold that powers conferred on the Minister by Section 126, subsection (3) are as broad and sweeping as those conferred on him by Section 126, subsection (2) which were under consideration in that case. ...
ONCA decision

Re Kemp, [1940-41] CTC 48

With respect, I do not think the considerations which weighed with the learned Judge in holding that the principle of the English cases referred to, does not apply, are relevant. ... :—I confess to having formed during and at the end of the argument of this appeal, a strong opinion that the reasoning and conclusion of my brother McTague could not be disturbed, but after a careful re-reading of the will and consideration of the eases, particularly In re Lord Armaghdale (1928), 44 T.L.R. 239, following In re Bowring; Wimble v. ...
ONCA decision

McKinlay Transport Limited and C.T. Transport Inc. v. Her Majesty the Queen, [1988] 1 CTC 426

The essential consideration in my view is that the requirement to produce is not so intrusive as a search or seizure, that it in no sense resembles a search and cannot be tantamount to a seizure because the person subject to it has a right to take action to circumvent the required production. ...

Pages