Search - considered

Similar Acts Evidence of similar acts is considered collateral, and therefore irrelevant, unless some special nexus between the fact in issue and the evidence tendered is shown, which creates a relationship beyond mere similarity. ...

Mr Justice Mahoney in The Queen v Arthill Enterprises Limited, [1975] CTC 594; 75 DTC 5419, states at 600 (DTC 5422): I have considered the cases referred to me by counsel as well as other cases. ...

GST for 2007 and 2008 and payroll for 2008 were considered in a second letter. ...

Both counsel agreed that the Canada-US Tax Convention Act, SC 1943-44, 7 & 8 Geo VI, c 21, really need not be considered in the case at bar for the Convention only applies if the plaintiff was in fact carrying on business in Canada or if it had industrial or commercial profits derived from Canadian sources. ...

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... ...

The following provisions of the Income Tax Act are in play: 5. (1)... a taxpayer’s income for a taxation year from an office or employment is the salary, wages and other remuneration, including gratuities, received by him in the year. 6. (3) An amount received by one person from another (a) during a period while the payee was an officer of, or in the employment of, the payer, or (b) On account or in lieu of payment of, or in satisfaction of, an obligation arising out of an agreement made by the payer with the payee immediately prior to, during or immediately after a period that the payee was an officer of, or in the employment of, the payer, shall be deemed, for the purposes of section 5, to be remuneration for the payee’s services rendered as an officer or during the period of employment, unless it is established that, irrespective of when the agreement, if any, under which the amount was received was made or the form or legal effect thereof, it cannot reasonably be regarded as having been received (c) as consideration or partial consideration for accepting the office or entering into the contract of employment, (d) as remuneration or partial remuneration for services as an officer or under the contract of employment, or (e) in Consideration or partial consideration for a covenant with reference to what the officer or employee is, or is not, to do before or after the termination of the employment. 56. (1) Without restricting the generality of section 3, there shall be included in computing the income of a taxpayer for a taxation year, (a) any amount received in the year as, on account of or in lieu of payment of, or in satisfaction of, (ii) a retiring allowance, (viii) a termination payment; 248. (1) In this Act “retiring allowance” means an amount received upon or after retirement from an office or employment in recognition of long service or in respect of loss of office or employment (other than a superannuation or pension benefit), whether the recipient is the officer of employee or a dependant, relation or legal representative; “termination payment” for a taxation year means an amount equal to the lesser of (a) the aggregate of all amounts each of which is an amount received in the year in respect of a termination of an office or employment, whether or not received pursuant to an order or judgment of a competent tribunal, other than (i) an amount required by any provision of this Act (other than subparagraph 56(1)(a)(viii)) to be included in computing the income of a taxpayer for a year, (b) the amount by which 50% of the aggregate of all amounts each of which is the amount that may reasonably be considered to be the employee’s salary, wages and other remuneration from an office or employment for the 12 months preceding the date that is the earlier of (i) the date on which the office or employment was terminated, and (ii) the date on which an agreement, if any, in respect of the termination was entered into exceeds the amount determined under paragraph (a) for each previous year in respect of that termination whether the recipient is the officer or employee whose office or employment was terminated or a dependant, relation or legal representative of the officer or employee; I do not accept the plaintiff’s thesis that this was, in fact, a $25,000 lump sum settlement of a right of action for dismissal without reasonable notice. ...

., all of the surrounding facts of the subject case must be considered before deciding into which one of the first two of three categories a taxpayer who is engaged in farming must be placed for the purpose of determining his taxable income and assessing him for income tax. ...

Justice Teitelbaum ordered that the taxpayer present his case first, as the onus was on him to prove the invalidity of the reassessments, which the Court considered prima facie valid under subsection 152(8) of the Act. ...

In preparation of the income statement it is considered proper accounting practice to match against revenue earned in any fiscal year the expenses incurred to earn that revenue. ...

The three departmental officers involved, namely the appeals officer, the section chief of the Appeals Division and the chief of appeals testified by way of affidavit that they considered the following facts: (a) the request made by the applicant and the reasons therefore [sic]; (b) in filing its income tax return for the 1990 taxation year, the applicant did not include income in the amount of $38,803.03 in its computation of total income; (c) the applicant does not dispute its tax liability; (d) the “self-assessing” system of taxation puts the onus on the taxpayer to properly report income; (e) there are a number of elective returns that can be filed in the year of death; (f) the guidelines established in Information Circular No. 92-2 and Internal Directive ARD-92-01 dated April 16, 1992 were not met in these circumstances. ...