Search - considered

The difference between the two rates would be sufficient to justify the appellant to sign “for the purpose of gaining income”. 4.03.3 The counsel for the appellant also submitted that the quantum of consideration is not a factor to be considered in determining whether a guarantee is given for the purpose of gaining income. ...

There were perhaps certain elements of “goodwill” in IEM (see in that case the comments concerning Metropolitan Taxi Limited v MNR, [1980] CTC 2609; 80 DTC 1528, but the Board did not accept the Minister’s argument that the amount of the “goodwilll” should be attributed to the number of beds, even when considered together with the patients’ contracts. ...

The following criteria should be considered: the profit and loss experience in past years, the taxpayer’s training, the taxpayer’s intended course of action, the capability of the venture as capitalized to show a profit after charging capital cost allowance. ...

It was considered to be in a general building zone although, because it was being used as a trailer court, it was designated “T” as to conform with the use to which it was presently being used. ...

As a result, the transfers are not allowable to a deduction pursuant to the provisions of paragraph 18(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act which reads as follows: 18. (1) In computing the income of a taxpayer from a business or property no deduction shall be made in respect of (a) an outlay or expense except to the extent that it was made or incurred by the taxpayer for the purpose of gaining or producing income from the business or property; Furthermore, the said transfers could not be considered a bad debt within the meaning of paragraph 20(1)(p) of the Act which reads as follows: 20. (1) Notwithstanding paragraphs 18(1)(a), (b) and (h), in computing a taxpayer’s income for a taxation year from a business or property, there may be deducted such of the following amounts as are wholly applicable to the source or such part of the following amounts as may reasonably be regarded as applicable thereto: (p) the aggregate of debts owing to the taxpayer (i) that are established by him to have become bad debts in the year, and (ii) that have (except in the case of debts arising from loans made in the ordinary course of business by a taxpayer part of whose ordinary business was the lending of money) been included in computing his income for the year or a previous year; From all the evidence before me, I hold that the debt owed to the appellant by the related companies arose from an advance of capital to them and that such loans, or shall I say the supplying of capital by way of inventory, by the appellant, was not made for the purpose of gaining or producing income from a business or property and, in consequence thereof, the loss arising from the related companies which failed to pay the appellant for the transfers of inventory is deemed to be nil by virtue of subparagraph 40(2)(g)(ii) which reads: 40. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), (g) a taxpayer’s loss, if any, from the disposition of a property, to the extent that it is (ii) a loss from the disposition of a debt or other right to receive an amount, unless the debt or right, as the case may be, was acquired by the taxpayer for the purpose of gaining or producing income from a business or property (other than exempt income) or as consideration for the disposition of capital property to a person with whom the taxpayer was dealing at arm’s length, See North West Tent & Awning Co Ltd v MNR, [1976] CTC 2332; 76 DTC 1227. ...

I cannot see, on the basis of the evidence, how Mr Mulvihill or indeed the applicant’s legal counsel can be considered directly or indirectly responsible for the applicant’s failure to file his Notices on time in the circumstances. ...

I am not certain that would be a point to be considered fatal to his case — because it would raise a question regarding the length of service necessary before a resignation would be effective as retirement. ...

It must now be considered how these principles of interpretation should be applied to the sections in question and also how the said sections are to be applied in light of the evidence presented to the Board. 4.03.2 Court costs First, it is beyond question that paragraph 8(1)(b) regarding court costs is a so-called exempting provision, because it authorizes an exemption in computing an employee’s income. ...

In the decision of Ronald Rooke v MNR, [1976] CTC 2412; 76 DTC 1307, at 2413 and 1308 respectively, the Honourable L J Cardin, PC, QC, Chairman, of the Board, states as follows: In my opinion, there can be instances in which the purchase of a customer list and nothing else might in itself be considered to be an operational expense made by an agent to acquire new customers and to produce more income. ...

In H Lionel Rosen v Her Majesty the Queen, [1976] CTC 462; 76 DTC 6274, a case upon which the respondent placed great reliance, Marceau, J, considered the situation of another part time university lecturer. ...