Search - considered

., [1969] C.T.C. 633, 69 D.T.C. 5429 the issue was whether the terms of a will affecting shares of a company owned by the estate could be considered in the determination of control. ... Sheppard, D.J. found that the terms of the will affecting the estate could not be considered and that the Articles of Association of M & R were the determining factor. ...

It was in fact considered that the share of the interests which the appellant acquired in the Rockland project in 1982 constituted an interest in the framework of an ordinary co-ownership. ... What we held was an ordinary co-ownership, and, in the financial statements, that co-ownership was considered, from the point of view of assets, as a joint venture, and it was...the sums thus disbursed to cover the construction costs of the project were presented as an investment in a joint venture. ...

Driedger considered Part I, Part Il, Part III, etc., as separate parts, each to be mutually exclusive of each other part. ... Case Law on Part 1.1 Section 180.1 was considered recently by Mr. Justice Rip in W. ...

Paragraphs 21(1)(a) and (b) read as follows: 21. (1) Where as a result of a transaction occurring after 1971 an amount (in this section referred to as the “actual amount") has become payable to a taxpayer in respect of a business carried on by him throughout the period commencing January 1, 1972 and ending immediately after the transaction occurred, for the purposes of section 14 of the amended Act the amount that has become so payable to him shall be deemed to be the aggregate of (a) an amount equal to a percentage, equal to 40% plus the percentage (not exceeding 60%) obtained when 5% is multiplied by the number of full calendar years ending in the period and before the transaction occurred, of the amount, if any, by which the actual amount exceeds the portion thereof referred to in subparagraph (b)(i), and an amount equal to the lesser of (i) the percentage, described in paragraph (a), of such portion, if any, of the actual amount as may reasonably be considered as being the consideration received by him for the disposition of, or for allowing the expiry of, a government right, and (ii) the amount, if any, by which the portion described in subparagraph (i) exceeds the greater of (A) the aggregate of all amounts each of which is an outlay or expenditure, made or incurred by the taxpayer as a result of a transaction occurring before 1972 for the purpose of acquiring the government right, or the taxpayer's original right in respect of the government right, to the extent that the outlay or expenditure was not otherwise deducted in computing the income of the taxpayer for any taxation year and would, if made or incurred by him as a result of a transaction occurring after 1971, be an eligible capital expenditure of the taxpayer, and (B) the fair market value to the taxpayer as at December 31, 1971 of the taxpayer's specified right in respect of the government right, if no outlay or expenditure was made or incurred by the taxpayer for the purpose of acquiring the right or, if an outlay or expenditure was made or incurred, if that outlay or expenditure would have been an eligible capital expenditure of the taxpayer if it had been made or incurred as a result of a a transaction occurring after 1971. 3.04.4 Under paragraph 21(3)(a) I.T.A.R., a government right is defined as follows: 21. (3) In this section, (a) a "government right" of a taxpayer means a right or licence (i) that enables the taxpayer to carry on a business activity in accordance with a law of Canada or of a province or Canadian municipality, to an extent to which he would otherwise be unable to carry it on in accordance therewith, (ii) that was granted or issued by Her Majesty in right of Canada or a province or a Canadian municipality, or by a department, board, agency or any other body authorized by or pursuant to a law of Canada, a province or a Canadian municipality to grant or issue such a right or licence, and (iii) that was acquired by the taxpayer (A) as a result of a transaction occurring before 1972, or (B) at a particular time for the purpose of effecting the continuation, without interruption, of rights that are substantially similar to the rights that the taxpayer had under a government right held by him before the particular time; The respondent based his argument that the milk quota is a government right on the fact that it is covered by the Farm Products Marketing Act, R.S.Q. 1977, c. ... None of the holdings of grain or of the livestock owned by the appellant as of that date are shown in the statement since again these could not be considered as part of the net income until they had been sold and realized upon. ...

It was not accepted by the majority decision, however, which held that once it is established that the second step of the two-step process was to weigh the facts of the case, objectively and relatively, as to whether the appellants’ ordinary mode and habit of work was such that farming could reasonably be considered as their chief source of income during the taxation years in question. ... In my view this alone would not be sufficient to place the farm into the category of a sideline business in the 1981 and 1982 years but would be just one factor to be considered in the global approach. ...

He said, because you acquired, found the investment, because you invited me in, you really have the right to make the decisions as to what you’re going to do with the property, although I would like to be able to express my views, and hopefully they’ll be considered. ... Moreover, this is not contradicted in substance by the respondent. 5.03.2 It seems at first glance that, because the transactions are the result of two expropriations and one forced sale, the profits therefrom must be considered as capital gains. ...

There would have been nothing to loan because without an unqualified opinion by the German auditors Dr Abromeit considered it impossible to sell interests in the partnership which, as a practical matter, was the only available source of funds. ... He stated at page 699: “The evidence indeed disclosed that Pigott paid the expenses and most of the accounts were submitted to Pigott who never considered them to be First Wentworth’s expenses. ...

He relied on three cases, which cases should be considered. The earliest of these cases is Granby Construction and Equipment Ltd v Milley, [1974] CTC 562; (1974), 47 DLR (3d) 427; 74 DTC 6300. ... They will be considered in connection with the general issue of the constitutionality of subsection 231(3) of the Act. ...

Expenses of the company considered by the respondent to be personal expenses of Mr Fortin 4.03 To facilitate the task of the witnesses, the respondent filed a table (Exhibit 1-4) showing expenses in the amount of $57,645.95 claimed by the company and disallowed. ... Normally, according to the principles set out above, they should be considered judicial admissions and the appeals of the appellant shareholder should be dismissed. ...

However the above considered evidence and the testimony of Mr. Raymond Rogers, at trial, leave no doubt that the subject computer components were used in the manufacture or production of goods — the very statutory expression enacted by Parliament. ... Minister of National Revenue (1994), 2 G.T.C. 5027, in regard to the physical separation of units claimed to be eligible for the same tax exemption as is here considered, it is stated (2 G.T.C. at page 5031): The majority of the Tribunal is of the view that the phrase “for use...primarily and directly” is intended to convey of being directly and primarily involved in the manufacture or production of goods. ...