Search - considered

  [31]         In Hagon v The Queen, 99 DTC 336, Justice Bowie considered the effects of a conviction from a plea bargain in criminal proceedings on a subsequent proceeding at paragraphs 9 to 11:     [9]  It is well settled that a conviction under the Income Tax Act may, in proper circumstances, give rise to an estoppel in later civil proceedings under the Act: Van Rooy v. ...   [33]         In Pontarini, at paragraph 23, Justice Boyle concluded that the taxpayer’s guilty plea to tax evasion was only one factor that should be considered and weighed by the Court. ...

Nonetheless, the Appellant argues that an alleged violation of the Jarvis principles, albeit prior to the Jarvis decision, and notwithstanding no argument was made thereon in subsequent trials and appeals, including the final jury trial in 2010 and its subsequent appeal, should be considered as a live issue before this Court, since it was not dealt with beforehand and hence the Respondent’s argument of issue estoppel cannot apply to the undetermined Charter issues that are still live before the Court.   ... If the Appellant himself did not see fit to raise the Charter issue before the competent Court in the first place, especially when the basis for his defence in his tax evasion trials was that he had no intent to commit tax evasion but only intended to protest what he considered unlawful government action or the constitutional validity of the Federal Government’s power to impose and collect taxes, then I certainly do not see how it can now be raised in the first instance here. ...

Therefore as at January 1, 1962 Robert became the beneficial owner of all the shares indicated and for the purposes of these appeals he may be considered as the registered owner which he did in fact become on July 6, 1964 after reaching his majority. ... He had made provision for Elaine so that only Robert’s future remained to be considered. ...

Rather, its purpose truly was to settle a breach of contract action. [17]          The Court held that since an eligible capital expenditure as defined in paragraph 14(5)(b) did not include a current deductible expense and since Naden, the actual payor, had incurred a current deductible expense by making the damages payment, Johnson, as notional payor, should also be considered to have made a current deductible expenditure. ... The agreements provided that the cost of these services would be considered as pre-payments of realty taxes that would otherwise be levied by the city. ...

  [10]            Before discussing the judgment at issue, the parties’ arguments should be considered.   ...   [21]            After disposing of a preliminary argument as to jurisdiction, which does not concern us, and setting out the sections considered relevant in the Act and the BIA, the judge undertook the analysis of the law in paragraphs 8 et seq. of her reasons ...

The question has been considered in several decisions in the United Kingdom dealing with statutes the wording of which differs but the intention is the same as s. 39(4)(b) of the Income Tax Act. ... The Court of Appeal held that they did not do so and that the National Provincial Bank Limited being the registered shareholder of all the “A” shares excluded the two directors from being considered as controlling the company despite the fact that they were managing trustees of the settlement. ...

The plaintiff argues that the $255,340 received by it should not be considered as income in its hands because the plaintiff had no absolute right to the funds; the plaintiff knew it was going to be required to pass that gain on to its customers; it didn’t matter that the specific customers to whom it would accrue could not be identified; it was a clear liability, definite and measurable (the inventory gain (part sold) plus interest from August 1, 1977, to December 31, 1977). ... Could the amount then be considered as an expense of making income because the plaintiff had a known and measurable liability to its customers at the end of 1977. ...

  [11]    In this case the issue is the meaning of the word “transaction” as it is used in subparagraph 152(4)(b)(iii) of the Act, which is a different provision than was considered by Justice Thurlow. ... The Queen, 23 the court considered the issue of how to interpret the words used in the Act and adopted the following commentary:           [T]he third edition of Driedger on the Construction of Statutes at page 163... says:                           It is presumed that the legislature uses language carefully and consistently so that within a statute or other legislative instrument the same words have the same meaning.                                                      ...               ...

He relies strongly on his submission that the Appellants were misled by Revenue Canada into believing that reconsideration requests were being considered and there was no need to file Notices of Appeal. ... As there were no valid objections for the companies, these amended returns could not be considered by an Appeals officer such as myself. ...

  [1]      The appellants, David Rajchgot and Jacqueline Lacey, appeal income tax assessments in which the Minister of National Revenue considered that they each incurred losses on account of capital when they sold securities of Tee‑Comm Electronics Inc. ... M.N.R., 62 DTC 1131(S.C.C.), Justice Martland, speaking for the majority, set out the "positive tests" originally considered by Thorson P. in Minister of National Revenue v. ...