Search - considered

Toutefois, comme le faisait remarquer le Juge Pigeon dans l'affaire Freud précitée: It is, of course, obvious that a loan made by a person who is not in the business of lending money is ordinarily to be considered as an investment. It is only under quite exceptional or unusual circumstances that such an operation should be considered as a speculation. ...

All of the foregoing sale properties are considered to be physically inferior to the Subject property. ... I tend to believe that the subject property had been improved to a degree somewhat greater than the average of the surrounding properties — but whether that was to the extent of $30,000 or not I do not know, and whether those improvements were considered as an advantage by the purchaser I do not know. ...

Roy M Power v The Queen, [1975] CTC 580; 75 DTC 5388. 4.03 Analysis 4.03.1 In examining the taxpayer’s course of conduct, the courts, among the different factors considered in the cases at law referred to above and in all others in which income versus capital gain is involved, always direct their research to the taxpayer’s intention. ... It follows that little help can be obtained from former decisions regarding what weight should be attributed to any particular circumstance in so far as it may prove or disprove any intention to engage in an adventure in the nature of trade, except in so far as any such decision might make one aware of a particular area or circumstance which should be considered or taken into account. 4.03.3 The secondary intention means that, even where it could be established that a taxpayer’s main intention was investment, a gain on the sale of the asset would be held taxable if the evidence showed that at the time of acquisition the taxpayer had in mind the possibility of selling the asset if his investment project for some reason did not materialize. ...

To analyze this situation a longer more detailed definition of market value is considered. ... The amount of $225,000 paid to Dr Bernèche, the former main shareholder of Les meubles de Maskinongé inc as special consultant ($15,000 for 15 years) was considered by the Tax Review Board in part as salary ($30,000) and in part as payment of the shares ($195,000). 4.03.3 In the instant case, the preponderance of the evidence is to the effect that in 1976 the Royal Bank of Canada was a special purchaser. ...

It is the appellant’s position that a payment can only be considered as having been received if the payment is made in an unrestricted and negotiable manner. ... Although the appellant, in stating that a payment is considered as having been made only when it is received, appeared to be referring to the cash method of accounting, the appellant did not establish that he was in fact using the cash method in computing his profit. ...

Margaret considered these amounts as her “loans” to John, she trusted him and signed whatever paper he required — after he had explained the documents to her. ... However, up to the time of sale of the Galt property, I must conclude that Margaret, by physical evidence and her testimony, has established her right to be considered as both the legal and the beneficial owner of that property. ...

This PO replaces R-1021 (1975) which is hereby considered complete. Attached to this “Blanket Order” was a typical “Amoeba” invoice, also filed as an exhibit, for the services of the appellant and his two associates: INVOICE: Accounting Department Petrofina Canada Ltd 11701 Sherbrooke St East Pointe aux Trembles, Quebec SERVICES RENDERED FOR THE PERIOD December 1976 PERSONNEL HOURS RATE AMOUNT Sr Piping Draftsman 154 $16.40 per hr $2525.60 (Mike Laing) Instrumentation Designer 107 $18.45 per hr 1974.15 (Rod Woolner) Senior Piping Designer 121 $18.45 per hr 2232.45 (George Teggin) Total $6732.20 It was the testimony of the appellant that this was the usual format, and that payment was made by Petrofina, all in one cheque to Amoeba. ... In that set of circumstances, some deductions directly related to the income from Innotech (or similar sources) could be considered. ...

His argument may be stated briefly as follows: The order having been made it must be assumed that the Court, as required by section 15 of the Dependants’ Relief Act, considered it to be just to allow the application to be made, notwithstanding that the six-month period from the grant of Letters of Administration for doing so had ended some 21 months prior to the application being made. ... In my view the foregoing explanation for the long delay which occurred in this case cannot be considered to be reasonable justification for that delay. ...

In a recent decision of the Board (Thompson v MNR — not yet published), the Minister did not impute and tax an interest charge on funds allegedly available from company resources, and this appeal might be considered on those grounds alone. ... The Minister is not merely shifting the burden of a cost from the company to the appellant, but rather inventing a new one, not considered to be a cost by the company, for annual return on capital, and stating that it should be borne by the appellant. ...

No further adjustments will be considered on the basis of cost variations, whatever they may be. ... The conditions stipulated by Hydro- Québec and described above are nevertheless indispensable conditions for the payment of the holdback, no less than the issuance of a certificate by an engineer. lt would appear to the Board that the holdbacks made in 1975 and 1976 cannot be considered accounts receivable as long as, in the first instance, the solemn declaration had not been signed by the appellant, which was done on December 12, 1977 and, in the second instance, as long as Hydro- Québec itself was not satisfied that all other conditions (including the payments owing to the various government agencies) had been fulfilled, which was not the case until August 1978. 6. ...