Search - considered

The Attorney General notes that lawyers are exempted from the Act’s reporting requirements that apply to accountants and other professionals who act as financial intermediaries. [80]                           In my view, there is considerable merit in the Attorney General’s submissions considered in relation to the broad notion of the independence of the bar asserted by the Federation.  ...         (1.21) For the purposes of subparagraphs (1)(b)(i) and (1.1)(b)(i),   (a) a financial services cooperative and each of its members that is a financial entity are considered to be members of the same association; and   (b) a credit union central and each of its members that is a financial entity are considered to be members of the same association ...

On this point, we should refer to Interpretation Bulletin IT-417R, concerns sections 9 and 18(9) and in which paragraph 3 reads as follows: To remove any uncertainty, subsection 18(9) of the Act was enacted into law on February 26, 1981, effective from December 11, 1979 and requires a taxpayer to match certain specified expenses to the taxation year to which they can reasonably be considered to relate. The department takes the view that subsection 18(9) was enacted for greater certainty and notwithstanding that it does not cover deferred charges or all types of expenses that can be prepaid, it is considered that the Income Tax Act (even as it read prior to the introduction of subsection 18(9)) always required and continues to require that all costs that could clearly be related to future periods be expensed in those periods, if they are important and if failure to defer the expense would distort the net profit not only of the year during which the expense was incurred but also of the subsequent year or years to which the benefit relates... 4.94.6(2) Counsel for the appellant commented as follows on the liquidity guarantee at pages 16 et seq. of his reply: In their second main argument, our friends argued that the expenses for the liquidity guarantee should be staggered over five (5) years. ... (The general area of what is comprehended in subparagraphs (i) and (ii) of section 11(1)(cb) is I think indicated by the scope of what is expressly excluded by subparagraphs (iii) and (iv) [at that time these subparagraphs did not include commissions and bonuses paid to agents and brokers] for the fact that it was considered expedient to expressly exclude commissions and bonuses and payment as or on account of principal or interest, to my mind shows that what is referred to as "as expense incurred in the year" in the course of issuing or selling shares or borrowing money for the purpose referred to is capable of embracing a broad class of expenditures...) and is authority for the acceptance of all expenses related to an issue or a loan. ...

This was not done, in my opinion, and I therefore need not examine the issue further. [185] In terms of taxation, in its decision in Jarvis (supra), the Supreme Court of Canada distinguished between Revenue Canada's audit and investigation functions and provided some factors to be considered in applying this distinction. ... Most surprising, however, is that he considered his donations to be a form of tax shelter and compared the amounts supposedly donated over the years at issue to amounts he subsequently invested in flow-through shares. ... Hanna was unable to demonstrate, other than by a simple statement, any sizeable donation made in the years before or after the years at issue strengthens the view whereby donations of such magnitude to the A.O.L.M. cannot reasonably be considered to be realistic for a person who has only been working for a few years, who has average income and has other obligations, such as current expenditures, parental assistance and repayment of a student loan. ...

Dumping is considered an unfair trade practice because imported goods are sold in Canada at a price (the export price) less than the price the goods are sold for in the country of origin (the normal value).  ...   [65]       Having considered the proposed categories of both parties, I am satisfied that the remaining 38 transactions can appropriately be dealt with under the defendant’s proposed categories.  ... The purpose of the anti-dumping order is to protect the A53 market (and the other markets named in the CITT order) considered to be at risk from dumping.  ...

The Plaintiffs state that no sovereign government such as Canada should ever borrow money from commercial banks at interest, when it can borrow from its own central bank interest-free, particularly when that central bank, unlike the banks of any other G-8 nation, is publically established, mandated, owned and accountable to Parliament and the Minister, and was created with that purpose as one of its main functions. [11]            Fourth, the Plaintiffs ask the Court to declare that the fact that the minutes of meetings involving the Governor of the Bank of Canada [Governor] and other G-8 central bank governors have been kept secret is ultra vires the Governor, as being contrary to the Bank Act – particularly s 24 – and ought to be considered unconstitutional conduct. [12]            The fifth declaration sought is that, by allowing the Governor to keep the nature and content of international bank meetings secret, by not exercising the authority and duty contained in ss 18(i) and (j) of the Bank Act, and in enacting s 18(m) of the Bank Act, Parliament has abdicated its duties and functions as mandated by ss 91(1)(a), (3), (14), (15), (16), (18), (19), (20) of the Constitution Act, 1867, as well as s 36 of the Constitution Act, 1982. [13]            The Plaintiffs’ sixth and seventh declarations involve the manner in which the Minister accounts for public finances, which the Plaintiffs say is conceptually and logically wrong. ... Now that amendments have been made the Court has to decide whether the Plaintiffs have resolved these problems. [125]        The grounds brought forward by the Defendants in the present Rule 221 motion, as well as the arguments of the Plaintiffs, have to be considered in light of what the Court has already ruled about the Bank Act claims and what the Federal Court of Appeal has endorsed. [126]        The Plaintiffs fault the Defendants for again raising arguments on justiciability that the Court has already decided and the Federal Court of Appeal has endorsed. ... Their argument is that freestanding declarations on the constitutionality of laws and legal authority are always available to any Canadian citizen. [136]        Since my Order of April 24, 2014 was considered by the Federal Court of Appeal, the Federal Court of Appeal has had occasion to consider and pronounce in some detail on what the Court can do with pleadings that contain freestanding requests for declaratory relief. ...

The difficulty with that is even if assessors spent time in Vocan’s facility on preparatory activities in connection with preparing Reports, it is only the predominant part of the service- the assessment conducted off-site- that is to be considered in making the determination as to whether the supply constituted an institutional health service. ... [11] In drawing the line between “ordinary” negligence or neglect and “gross” negligence a number of factors have to be considered. ... The Court considered what was integral to the overall supply of livestock and concluded it was the buying service, thus only a single supply was provided as such service was indivisible from other services offered. [28] In Applewood Holdings Inc. v. ...

In this case there were personal elements involved such as the Appellant being involved in the business (just for fun), many of the expenses should be considered to be non-business items. [14]          With respect to the Herbalife and the jeans enterprises the Appellant was only involved in a preliminary way. ... He considered what Drozdzik told him. He was not the author of the documents except to prepare the index. ... The expenses were not reasonable and must be considered to have been personal in nature. [267]        As referred to in Stewart, supra at paragraph 63, this Court concludes that even though the Appellant had an abiding intention of making a profit from the activities, the Court is satisfied that "the activity was not carried out in accordance with objective standards of businesslike behavior". ...

Pat Paletta considered the reporting of the trades thoughtfully, obtained professional advice on the proper reporting of the trades, and relied on his longstanding and trusted accountants to prepare his returns. ... Angelo Paletta testified that his father was “a wizard with numbers” and “had a computer brain”. [203] [266] Before leaving the statute-barred issue, I have carefully considered whether the carry over of a portion of the overstated 2002 loss to the 2005 taxation year under section 111 of the Act was attributable to carelessness or neglect on the part of Mr. ... Since it is a subjective test, the personal attributes of the individual may be considered in determining whether the individual is wilfully blind. [116] On the other hand, the “gross negligence” standard is an objective test. ...

There is no suggestion in his reasons that it could have been considered an invitation to enter without showing her the search warrant. [67] Both RCMP officers then entered the house to satisfy themselves there were no threats to the investigators’ safety. The CRA Criminal Investigations’ investigators then entered and search the house and seized a number of documents. [68] Judge Gouge then considered the requirements of section 29(1) of the Criminal Code which provides: “It is the duty of everyone who executes a process or warrant to have it with him, where it is feasible to do so, and to produce it when requested to do so” « Quiconque exécute un acte judiciaire ou un mandat est tenu de l’avoir sur soi, si la chose est possible, et de le produire lorsque demande lui en est faite » [69] When asked by Judge Gouge why she did not give Ms. ... Informer privilege precluded the McCarties having this information. [4] The possibility of amicus curiae was also considered, but was found to be precluded by valid precedent. [5] Note Mr. ...

The appellant never considered the money deposited into her bank account as her property and in that respect she is not the “transferee” of the alleged “transfer of property;”   16.     ...