Search - considered

After these discussions, Rose corrected the various entries in the general ledger of R.V.P. for 1985 and 1986 to record what he and Voukelatos considered the proper transaction, that is, that R.V.P. purchased the shares. ... There are however, certain limitations that must be considered in examining the plea of non est factum. ... This Court recently considered appeals in which taxpayers asked the Court to find they erred in executing certain documents and that these documents ought to be ignored by the respondent when making an assessment. ...

The Respondent’s position is that it is insufficient for the Appellant to state that he always considered that these payments were a repayment of his loan, because it is not simply what the Appellant intended to do but, rather, what he actually did that is relevant to the payment characterization ... Caselaw has confirmed that a payment, made by a corporation to its shareholder/lender, will not be considered an automatic setoff but, rather, its true nature will be determined by the parties’ intentions respecting the payments together with the entirety of the evidence adduced at the hearing ... (as he was then) stated at paragraph 11 of that decision:      [11] In drawing the line between “ordinary” negligence or neglect and “gross” negligence a number of factors have to be considered. ...

Section 245 reads: (1) In this section, “tax benefit"' — “tax benefit” means a reduction, avoidance or déferrai of tax or other amount payable under this Act or an increase in a refund of tax or other amount under this Act; “tax consequences’ — “tax consequences” to a person means the amount of income, taxable income, or taxable income earned in Canada of, tax or other amount payable by or refundable to the person under this Act, or any other amount that is relevant for the purposes of computing that amount; “transaction” — “transaction” includes an arrangement or event. (2) Where a transaction is an avoidance transaction, the tax conséquences to a person shall be determined as is reasonable in the circumstances in order to deny a tax benefit that, but for this section, would result, directly or indirectly, from that transaction or from a series of transactions that includes that transaction. (3) An avoidance transaction means any transaction (a) that, but for this section, would result, directly or indirectly, in a tax benefit, unless the transaction may reasonably be considered to have been undertaken or arranged primarily for bona fide purposes other than to obtain the tax benefit; or (b) that is part of a series of transactions, which series, but for this section, would result, directly or indirectly, in a tax benefit, unless the transaction may reasonably be considered to have been undertaken or arranged primarily for bona fide purposes other than to obtain the tax benefit. (4) For greater certainty, subsection (2) does not apply to a transaction where it may reasonably be considered that the transaction would not result directly or indirectly in a misuse of the provisions of the Act or an abuse having regard to the provisions of this Act, other than this section, read as a whole. (5) Without restricting the generality of subsection (2), (a) any deduction in computing income, taxable income, taxable income earned in Canada or tax payable or any part thereof may be allowed or disallowed in whole or in part, (b) any such deduction, any income, loss or other amount or part thereof may be allocated to any person, (c) the nature of any payment or other amount may be recharacterized, and (d) the tax effects that would otherwise result from the application of other provisions of this Act may be ignored, in determining the tax consequences to a person as is reasonable in the circumstances in order to deny a tax benefit that would, but for this section, result, directly or indirectly, from an avoidance transaction. (6) Where with respect to a transaction (a) a notice of assessment, reassessment or additional assessment involving the application of subsection (2) with respect to the transaction has been sent to a person, or (b) a notice of determination pursuant to subsection 152(1.11) has been sent to a person with respect to the transaction, any person (other than a person referred to in paragraph (a) or (b) shall be entitled, within 180 days after the day of mailing of the notice, to request in writing that the Minister make an assessment, reassessment or additional assessment applying subsection (2) or make a determination applying subsection 152(1.11) with respect to that transaction. (7) Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, the tax consequences to any person, following the application of this section, shall only be determined through a notice of assessment, reassessment, additional assessment or determination pursuant to subsection 152(1.11) involving the application of this section. (8) On receipt of a request by a person under subsection (6), the Minister shall, with all due dispatch, consider the request and, notwithstanding subsection 152(4), assess, reassess or make an additional assessment or determination pursuant to subsection 152(1.11) with respect to that person, except that an assessment, reassessment, additional assessment or determination may be made under this subsection only to the extent that it may reasonably be regarded as relating to the transaction referred to in subsection (6). ...

The nature of the trade is to be considered. To give an illustration, losses sustained by a railway company in compensating passengers for accidents in travelling might be deducted. ... Crocket, J. considered the test laid down in the Addie case (supra) and approved in the Tata case (supra) binding and held that the expenditure did not fall within it. ... Apart from the decision as to the non-deductibility of the kind of item of expenditure considered in that case, with which we are not here concerned, I think it is clear that, by its adoption of the test in the Addie case (supra) as being applicable in the con- struction of sec. 6(a), the Supreme Court of Canada decided that the words ‘‘for the purpose of earning the income’’ in sec. 6(a) have substantially the same meaning as the words ‘‘for the purposes of the trade’’ in the corresponding rule under the English Act. ...

  [34]            The issue then becomes “whether GMCL should be considered as trustee so that section 267.1 can apply” (paragraph 38 of the Tax Court Judge’s reasons for judgment) ... According to Her, the pension plan trusts are a third person involved and their existence and role should be considered in determining the activity in which the investment management services are used. ... As a matter of law, she says, pension plans are separate and distinct from other businesses, and a pension plan fund cannot be considered as being part of an employer’s business activity ...

Indeed, Mr Hart explained that the only reason for segregating this amount and showing it as a separate item as “Accounts payable—Affiliated companies” instead of including it in the total of “Accounts payable—Trade” is that it is considered desirable in financial reporting for a company of this nature to show precisely the amount of accounts payable which is owing to affiliated companies; otherwise the amount would have been included in the total of trade accounts payable, which they are. ... The provision of the Ontario Act in question in both those cases, with the omission of words not relevant to the point being considered here, is as follows: The paid-up capital of a corporation for a fiscal year is its paid-up capital as it stood at the close of the fiscal year and includes... all sums or Credits advanced or loaned to the corporation by any other corporation, excluding a bank,.... ... These have been considered and stated in a number of authorities. In Pretty v Solly (1859), 26 Beav 606 (53 ER 1032) it is thus stated at page 610: The general rules which are applicable to particular and general enactments in statutes are very clear, the only difficulty is in their application. ...

While the debt constituted by the balance of a sale price cannot be considered a loan or advance, it also cannot be categorized as simply an account payable, since it is represented by a specific financing instrument. ... If this were the only factor considered, it could be concluded that the amount of the “notes payable” was correctly included in the appellant’s capital for the purposes of the tax under Part 1.3 of the Act. ... The arguments in support of that position were that the legal effect of such instruments was not evident as far as their accounting presentation was concerned and that such instruments represented short-term debts and thus could not be considered external capital used to finance a corporation’s operations. ...

Chartered accountants are not, as a rule, engaged in defending themselves against charges relating to infringements of provincial securities legislation and, therefore, such fees would not generally be considered a usual and accepted business expense associated with the provision of professional accounting services.   ... The first part considered the merits of the allegations, which focused on the nature and quality of public disclosure made by the respondents in respect of Blue Range Resource Corporation in the period April 1, 1997, to December 12, 1998.   14.  ... In a letter dated December 22, 2006, the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Alberta informed the appellant that, pursuant to paragraph 101(1) of the Regulated Professions Act (“RAPA”), they considered the Alberta Securities Commission Merits Decision to constitute a complaint under RAPA.   18.  ...

At paragraphs 47 and 60, the Federal Court of Appeal considered the phrase “in lieu of” in the context of the opening words of subsection 212(1):   [47]       However, paragraph 212(1)(d) of the Income Tax Act also includes a payment made in lieu of compensation for the use, in Canada, of property. ... The Appellant submits that the phrase “instead of” is to be preferred in the context of subsection 216(1), especially when subsections 157(2.1) and 218.3(3) are considered. ...   [21]     The Appellant also suggested that the application of subsection 161(7) provides a context within which the section 216 return might be considered. ...

  [5]              My colleague Justice Paris considered a similar appeal in Pan et al v. ... Each university has its own policy but academic remediation or probation usually provides for an extension to the particular resident's residency during which he or she repeats rotations that were considered unsatisfactory ... The Court held that focusing on hours worked and hours spent in studies reasonably distinguished between workers who studied and students who worked: employees working long enough hours to be considered full‑time filled the conventional measure of available time with work. ...