Search - considered

Property used more than 50% of the time for the purpose of gaining or producing gross revenue that is rent, royalty or leasing revenue is considered to be used principally for that purpose. ... Counsel for the respondent referred the Court to several decisions in which the term “passenger" was considered. Most of these decisions related to sections of provincial Vehicles Acts and must be considered with care. ...

Graham stressed that a purchase of a list of accounts from Shell did not eliminate Shell, nor could a purchase of this nature be considered as buying the business of Shell. ... No reason has been advanced for the appellant to have considered or apprehended that the Ingersoll operation would have been dealt with differently. I have considered the decision of Halliday Fuels v. M.N.R., supra, which is a decision of the then Tax Appeal Board in 1960. ...

Counsel agreed that the amount at issue is to be considered as being $8,517 received by the appellant in the 1977 taxation year. ... Atkins considered the whole amount as damages for breach of contract and, as such, contended that it was non-taxable. ... Mr Lefebvre’s last contention that the amount received by the taxpayer was a taxable capital gain cannot, in our opinion, be considered. ...

However, as will be noted below, this does not have relevance in that we have rejected the approach that would be employed by “ordinary” purchasers in the market place and have considered the fact that, at the valuation date, there existed a special purchaser. ... For example, if in 1981 a sale took place to a party who can be considered a special purchaser — and that such purchaser had also been in the marketplace as a special purchaser at V-Day.’ ... To his credit, Mr Wise restricted his comments to provide for such a distinction, and I quote from page 6 of his report: The definition of fair market value also contemplates the highest price obtainable; therefore, the existence inclusion of one or more “special purchasers’’ or “special interest purchasers” in the market was considered by us. ...

The Guidelines set out factors the Minister will consider in her review of a late-filed election but cautions that each request will be considered on a case-by-case basis. ... Henderson to have considered cases involving different ITA and ETA election provisions in the absence of judicial interpretation of subsection 156(4). ... I have considered the parties’ agreement and will adopt their proposal. ...

He further considered that the amount claimed was not reasonable in the circumstances and could not be deducted pursuant to s. 67 of the Act. ... The appellant considered these salary and education expenses paid during those years as expenses of operating his business. ... Furthermore, if the expense is considered from a practical and commercial standpoint, it is unlikely that an employer would have incurred such expense if he had not regarded it as an essential element in the pursuit of profits for his business. ...

Hamel stated that she would have done the estate tax planning differently had she known that no deduction was available, and that completing the tax return without this information had resulted in undesirable tax consequences. [39] The Director General considered whether any Agency official had taken an incorrect action or provided incorrect advice and found that (1) the Agency had returned Ms. ... When considered together, these factors militate for a duty of fairness at the lower end of the scale” (Waycobah FC at para 54). [61] In Waycobah FCA, the FCA made it clear that the Act prescribes no procedure for dealing with requests for tax debt remission. This is left to the discretion of the Minister (Waycobah FCA at para 30), and the process followed, while not including an opportunity to “speak” directly to the decision-maker, does provide an opportunity to be heard (Waycobah FCA at para 33). b) Standard of review [62] The next step is to establish the applicable standard of review, although the term is not always considered entirely appropriate when dealing with natural justice and procedural fairness. ...

While recognizing that remission is discretionary and that each case must be considered on its own facts, the Remission Guide sets out four factors that are typically considered: extreme hardship, financial setback coupled with extenuating factors, incorrect action or advice on the part of CRA officials, and unintended results of the legislation: Jefferson v Canada (Attorney General), 2021 FC 658 at para 34; Meleca v Canada (Attorney General), 2020 FC 1159 at para 9. ... The Applicant’s ruling request, according to the CRA, was the first to be considered by the CRA since Le Gardeur. ... The Assistant Commissioner further indicated that he had considered all relevant factors to determine “whether it would be fair, reasonable or otherwise in the public interest to recommend remission”, and decided not to. ...

The property in question would from the United States’ viewpoint be considered as a capital asset and in fact capital gains were paid to the United States on the profit arising from the sale thereof. ... Even acceding to respondent’s contention that the entity to be here considered is the partnership itself, I fail to see how this partnership meets the definition of Canadian enterprise as contained in section 3(e) of the Protocol. ... I have the firm view that regardless of whether the Canadian venture is looked at as merely a part of the appellant’s total enterprise or as a separate partnership in itself, it can by no means be considered a Canadian enterprise within the meaning of the Protocol. ...

The effects of an emphyteutic lease, although in an entirely different context, were considered by Noël, J, as he then was, in the case of Nathan Cohen and Hyman Zalkind v MNR, [1967] CTC 254; 67 DTC 5175, in which the lessee was held to be entitled to claim capital cost allowance under Class 3 (buildings) at the rate of 5% instead of under Class 13 (leasehold interests) at the annual rate of one-fortieth of its capital cost on a building already on property acquired by the appellants at a time when the 99-year emphyteutic lease still had 58 years to run. ... In order for an item of expenditure to be considered as a capital expenditure it is not necessary that it should have been made in order to acquire a tangible asset, itself of a depreciable nature. ... On the other hand, I do not believe that these expenses and costs can be considered as being a Capital outlay or loss. ...