Search - consideration

Results 361 - 370 of 626 for consideration
T Rev B decision

Aiierton Cushman and Harry Cavanagh, Executors of the Estate of Renee Scharf Cushman v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2122, 76 DTC 1102

At page 7 of Exhibit R-1, Mr Dean states in part as follows: Value of Land by Market Data Approach This method is by far the most reliable since It takes into consideration all the factors affecting the value of the property, providing the proper adjustments are made to compensate for the passage of time, location, productivity, size, etc., etc... ...
T Rev B decision

Jacques Lecompte and Philip a McNeely v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2127, 76 DTC 1104

The aggregate consideration paid by the Company to the Appellant and Lecompte for the business, assets, undertaking and goodwill of the business was the sum of $76,477.52 of which $50,000 was on account of goodwill, payable to the extent of $21,996.63 by the assumption by the Company of liabilities of the business as at January 2, 1969, and to the extent of $54,480.89 by the Company issuing the following shares from Treasury and being liable for payment of the following amounts: Appellant Lecompte Issue of 50 common shares each of $1.00 per share $ 50.00 50.00 issue of 1,000 preference shares each at $10.00 per share 10,000.00 10,000.00 Amounts due to Shareholders 17,190.45 17,190.44 $27,240.45 $27,240.44 TOTAL $54,480.89 Schedule A of the agreement of sale dated January 2, 1969, filed as Exhibit A-3, reads as follows: SCHEDULE "A” Cash on hand $374.86 Accounts Receivable 20,902.66 Equipment 5,000.00 Goodwill 50,000.00 Prepaid expense 200.00 $76,477.52 Less: Bank loan $15,000.00 Bank overdraft 4,185.47 Accounts payable and accrued expenses 2,811.16 $21,996.63 NET BALANCE $54,480.89 In reassessing both appellants, the respondent set the value of goodwill of the partnership at $20,000, or $10,000 to each appellant, and any sum received by either of them in excess of that amount was assessed pursuant to the said subsection 8(1) referred to above. ...
T Rev B decision

Joseph Beausoleil and Maurice Beausoleil v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2142, 76 DTC 1113

For the above reasons, these appeals are allowed in part and the matter referred back to the Minister for reconsideration and reassessment, so that he may take into consideration the fact that the appellants were neither members nor beneficiaries of a partnership. ...
T Rev B decision

Barry Beech v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2175, 76 DTC 1134

As to the question of the $11,000 gain, he argued that there was $6,000 worth of holdbacks due to Mr Beech, and that this amount could be regarded as part consideration for the disposition of the equipment in accordance with paragraph 20(6)(g) of the Income Tax Act. ...
T Rev B decision

Estate of W C Cochrane v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2215

One consideration may point so clearly that it dominates other and vaguer indications in the contrary direction. ...
T Rev B decision

Carl G Wilson, Murray Wilson v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2245, 76 DTC 1187

Further, the efforts at identifying the nature of the estimated portion of personal expenses charged against each appellant leaves some room for further consideration. ...
T Rev B decision

Jean Crevier v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2271, 76 DTC 1208

—Notwithstanding subsection (1), (g) a taxpayer’s loss, if any, from the disposition of a property, to the extent that it is (ii) a loss from the disposition of a debt or other right to receive an amount, unless the debt or right, as the case may be, was acquired by the taxpayer for the purpose of gaining or producing income from a business or property (other than exempt income) or as consideration for the disposition of capital property to a person with whom the taxpayer was dealing at arm’s length, or is nil. ...
T Rev B decision

Donalde Hamacha v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2327, 76 DTC 1249

Appeal Dismissed Following the hearing of evidence, consideration of the Act and the case law, the appeal must be dismissed and the assessment of respondent upheld. ...
T Rev B decision

Michele Hardy De Loppinot v. ‘Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2454, 76 DTC 1334

., Party of the second. part The party of the first part transfers. to the: party of the second part the present and future clients of his chartered accountant practice, in consideration of a share equal to twenty per cent of the fees generated by these clints (list attached) and received over the five (5) years following the date of this agreement for present clients, and over the five years following the date on which professional activity begins, for future clients. ...
T Rev B decision

Russell Zarbatany v. Minister of National Revenue, [1974] CTC 2195, [1974] DTC 1134

Without attempting to determine whether it is the provisions of the Quebec Civil Code or those of a federal statute which take precedence where there appears to be a conflict, I think that a practical solution can often be found if consideration is given to the general aim of each of the laws. ...

Pages