Search - considered

The parties, however, by an agreement made contemporaneously with the granting of the option to the Shell Company which recited that the companies considered that it was in their mutual interests to grant the option, agreed that in the event that Shell purchased any of the mineral rights, Minerals would accept $2 per acre as settlement for its interest in the rights so purchased. ... The learned judge rejected this contention since he considered that it was clear that after December 30, 1950, Minerals was entitled to the full royalty of nine per cent and Leaseholds to no part of it. He considered that the only reasonable interpretation to put upon that part of the Agreement of Settlement and Adjustments referred to was that Minerals thereby agreed to cancel that part of their contract of July 7, 1944, by the terms of which Leaseholds was bound to pay Minerals one per cent more royalty than Imperial Oil would pay by the terms of the new agreement of December 30, 1950. ...

The appellant attempted to purchase the property adjoining 56 Donald Street, again for the avowed purpose of improving this particular holding, this time as a potential apartment site, but the appellant considered the prospective vendor’s asking price to be exorbitant. ... The appellant refused several unsolicited offers to purchase properties owned by it for the obvious reason that it considered the offered prices too low. ... Statements now made as to intention at the time of acquisition must be considered along with the objective facts. ...

The donation to be made by me to THE ROYAL TRUST COMPANY for the benefit of my said daughter, AGNES HENRY WILSON, shall be considered as a payment to my daughter in advance on account of her share in my estate and in the division of my estate the TRUST PROPERTY mentioned in the said Deed, or the securities representing the same at the time of my death, shall be considered as of the value of FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLARS? ... The aforesaid treatise next goes on to say that: “In the case of a general power it is considered by the legislature that such a power in the hands of the donee (or holder of property) amounts to ownership of the property comprised in the power.” ...

He said that they had considered the facts, the past performance of the registered proprietorship and the potentialities of future business and arrived at $75,000 as a fair figure for the goodwill. ... Pomerlan, the senior valuator of the valuation unit of the Department at Ottawa, considered that there was no element of goodwill in the appellant’s business, that it was highly personal to him and not transferable and that his connection of customers had no value. ... The privilege, granted by the seller of a business to the purchaser, of trading as his recognized successor; the possession of a ready formed ‘connexion’ of customers, considered as an element in the saleable value of a business, additional to the value of the plant, stock-in-trade, book-debts, etc.” ...

After the appellant filed its income tax return for the 1950 taxation year, (a) the return was inspected by an assessor who checked the computation of the tax payable by the appellant on the basis that the taxable income shown by the income tax return was correct; (b) the work of the original assessor was checked by another assessor; (ec) the payments claimed to have been made were checked by an appropriate section of the Toronto Office of the Department; (d) the tax payable by the appellant was determined by the Deputy Minister as indicated on the original ‘ Notice of Assessment’ without further investigation than indicated by subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of this paragraph; (e) the original ‘Notice of Assessment’ was sent out on behalf of the Deputy Minister; (f) it having been decided that the return should be reviewed to ascertain whether a ‘reassessment’ was appropriate, another assessor inspected the return and, upon checking the computation of taxable income, conducted an examination of the Company’s records as a result of which a ‘reassessment’ of the Company was considered by the appropriate officers of the Department and the tax payable by the taxpayer was redetermined by the Deputy Minister as indicated on the ‘Notice of Reassessment’; and (g) the ‘Notice of Reassessment’ was sent out on behalf of the Deputy Minister. 4. ... He submitted that all that the Minister had done by the checks made by his officers and his determination, through the Deputy Minister, of the tax as indicated in the original notice without further investigation, as set out in paragraphs (a) to (d) of Section 3 of the agreed statement of facts was the performance of a purely mathematical function, but the assessment function required more than this; that it cannot be said that the Minister made an assessment if all that his officers did was to peruse the return and compute the tax on the basis shown by the taxpayer without any separate computation by them; that the Minister must do more than merely have his officers peruse or inspect the taxpayer’s return and accept his computations, as checked, of his income, his taxable income and his tax; that assessment is a formal and important operation; that while the Minister may make certain assumptions, such as that the return is in accordance with the books, that what is listed as income has been received or is receivable, that the stated expenditures have been made, that the taxpayer’s method of accounting is consistent with that of prior years, that the items in the return are the only ones to be considered and the like, he must, nevertheless, ascertain for himself that the taxpayer has properly computed his income, his taxable income and his tax; that in the course of such ascertainment the Minister must decide whether the deductions claimed are proper and check all additions and subtractions; that the Minister must also determine whether instalment payments have been made as required and whether any interest is payable; and that the Minister must do all these acts before it can be said that he has made an assessment. ... In support of his submissions counsel referred to certain decisions of this Court in which the nature of the assessment operation was considered. ...

It is thus a cardinal rule of interpretation that the context in which a word in the Act appears must always be considered in order to ascertain its true meaning. Here the meaning of the word “year” in the expression “year immediately following the taxation year’’ in Section 5(p) must be determined and the context in which it appears must be considered. ... I have already referred to Section 4(5) of chapter 43 of the Statutes of 1944-1945 but Section 4(6) of the 1944 amendments should also be considered. ...

The fundamental difficulty with this argument is that the Applicant only challenged the first-level review Officer’s decision on the basis that he had not considered the accountant’s move. ... She concluded that it is but “one factor considered to determine whether or not the CRA will cancel or waive penalties and interest”. ... Moreover, as the Respondent notes, the first-level review Officer considered these circumstances, but did not receive any further explanation or information from the Applicant when requested. ...

No explanation given as to why this income received by the applicant in 2019 is not considered income. 3. ... Considering the Applicant’s statements that he was frequently compensated in food and hotel rooms, did not have consistent hours or a contract, and did not keep track of any income received, the Third Reviewer concluded that the Applicant had not demonstrated that any income from this source could reasonably be considered self-employment income. [15] In paragraph 34 of her affidavit, Ms. ... In my opinion, based on the information and documentary evidence, including information available about the Applicant’s tax history that was considered by the officer, the decision maker reasonably found that the Applicant was not eligible for benefits under the Act because he did not meet the income threshold. [36] In the result, this application for judicial review is dismissed. [37] The Respondent seeks costs. ...

The Officer was also asked, if she considered the Applicant’s income and deductions from income for the 2017 to 2020 taxation years as recorded on CRA’s computer system as part of her review, then what was the basis of her conclusion? ... In this case, the record demonstrates that CRA considered all of the documents submitted by the Applicant. ... Having considered the factors listed in sub rule 400(3) of the Rules, and all other circumstances of this case, I find that no award for costs is warranted in this matter. ...

Since the concept of a “business” is not exhaustive, the Courts have identified a number of factors to be considered to determine whether actions or activities that have a personal element constitute the carrying on of a business for the purposes of subsection 9(1) and paragraph 18(1)(a) of the ITA. ... Canada, [5] the Supreme Court of Canada (“SCC”) considered and set aside the concept of “a reasonable expectation of profit” [6] as a factor to consider in determining whether a business exists and expenses or losses are deductible against net sources of income. ... In Stewart, the SCC confirmed that the other factors identified in Moldowan should be considered in determining whether actions and activities that have a personal element constitute the carrying on of a business as a source of income for the purpose of the ITA. [14] The relevant factors for distinguishing elements of a personal nature from activities that are undertaken in the course of a business include: (1) the profit and loss experiences in past years; (2) the taxpayer’s training; (3) the taxpayer’s intended course of action; and (4) the capability of the venture to show a profit. [8] In Stewart, the SCC noted that those four factors are not exhaustive, and that the factors will differ with the nature and extent of the activities. [15] I will consider the factors noted above in the present case, because they are useful in determining whether the actions Mr. ...