Search - considered

He considered the question, "when did the estate become indefeasibly vested in Mrs. ... Whether property was "vested indefeasibly" in a spouse as required by subsection 7(1) of the Estate Tax Act, S.C. 1958, c. 29, was considered in Dontigny Estate v. ...

The relevant questions of law must therefore be considered and decided on the basis of that uncontested evidence establishing the nature of the agreements that resulted from the exchanges of consents between the parties.  ... These requirements must be considered when going beyond the intention declared in the writing to determine the parties’ true intention.  ...

This making available of tax room is considered a federal contribution to a province (See Schedule "A"). 22. ... It requires a determination of the validity of the Income Tax Act and thus must be considered with the other impugned statutes. ...

I agree with Rothstein J.A.’s conclusion at para. 21:   The enactment of a statutory stay which specifies when collection action may commence, cannot logically support the inference that Parliament considered that no limitation period should apply to that collection action.   18                                A purposive analysis of the ITA   confirms that the collection provisions do not by implication exclude the operation of s. 32.  ... The Queen, [1983] 2 F.C. 841, the Federal Court of Appeal considered whether s. 38(2)   of the FCA   applied to the Minister’s registration of a certificate under the Excise Tax Act.  ...

We have considered the two questions and the Respondent’s answers are as follows:   1.     ... Considered without reference to the English version, the Minister’s powers of reassessment once there is any misrepresentation or fraud as described in subparagraph (b) and (c) appear to be wide open and unlimited. ...

Analysis and determination regarding the benefit conferred on the Appellants under subsection 15(1) of the Act   [34]          Subsection 15(1) of the Act reads as follows:   15. (1) Benefit conferred on shareholder-- Where at any time in a taxation year a benefit is conferred on a shareholder, or on a person in contemplation of the person becoming a shareholder, by a corporation otherwise than by   (a) the reduction of the paid-up capital, the redemption, cancellation or acquisition by the corporation of shares of its capital stock or on the winding-up, discontinuance or reorganization of its business, or otherwise by way of a transaction to which section 88 applies,   (b) the payment of a dividend or a stock dividend;   (c) conferring, on all owners of common shares of the capital stock of the corporation at that time, a right in respect of each common share, that is identical to every other right conferred at that time in respect of each other such share, to acquire additional shares of the capital stock of the corporation, and, for the purpose of this paragraph,   (i) where   (A) the voting rights attached to a particular class of common shares of the capital stock of a corporation differ from the voting rights attached to another class of common shares of the capital stock of the corporation, and,   (B) there are no other differences between the terms and conditions of the classes of shares that could cause the fair market value of a share of the particular class to differ materially from the fair market value of a share of the other class,   the shares of the particular class shall be deemed to be property that is identical to the shares of the other class, and   (ii) rights are not considered identical if the cost of acquiring those rights differs,   (d) an action described in paragraph 84(1)(c.1), 84(1)(c.2) or 84(1)(c.3) ... To summarize, Robertson may be considered to stand for the proposition that where, in the course of an employment relationship, an employee receives a right to acquire property from his or her employer upon the fulfillment of a condition or contingency, the receipt of that right will not constitute a paragraph 6(1)(a) benefit to the employee and such a benefit will not arise until the condition or contingency has been fulfilled. ...

There remains to be considered whether the second requirement of the subsection has also been satisfied. ... RS 1965, c 126, s 4; 1977-78, c 19, s 1. 2 *Subsection 70(6.1) reads as follows: 70 (6.1) For the purposes of subsection (6) and paragraph 104(4)(a), a trust shall be considered to be created by a taxpayer’s will if the trust is created (a) under the terms of the taxpayer’s will; (b) by a disclaimer by a beneficiary under the taxpayer’s will; or (c) by an order of a court in relation to the testator’s estate made pursuant to any law of a province providing for the relief or support of a testator’s depend ants. ...

Holdings Limited should be created on December 23, 1965 to hold all assets of Deltona of Canada Limited, other than cash, so that the assets held by Deltona of Canada Limited were liquid, that Deltona of Canada Limited would not be holding unliquid assets and so be considered as carrying on business in Canada and so that the vesting of non-liquid assets in T.D.C. Holdings Limited would enable a decision to liquidate Deltona of Canada Limited to be postponed and other means considered in the event of an unfavourable ruling from the United States taxing authorities. ...

Notwithstanding the absence of a provision corresponding to Rule 3 of the General Rules referred to above, that is a fact to be considered. ... Moreover, in the majority of these cases, the taxpayer was held liable, not because his visits to England were of such a nature that they were considered sufficient to qualify him as a "resident", but for the reason that he had never ceased to be a resident of England, and that his occasional absences had never deprived him of his status of British resident. ...

The Charter arguments are considered below. Charter argument Before dealing with the substantive Charter issues, I wish to comment on the question of remedy. ... As a result, the Crown was unable to provide a considered response. At the suggestion of the presiding Judge, it was determined that the matter of remedy would be deferred to a subsequent hearing if the Charter arguments were found to have merit. ...