Search - considered

Results 1691 - 1700 of 2927 for considered
FCTD

Paco Corp. v. The Queen, 80 DTC 6328, [1980] CTC 409 (FCTD)

Canadian and American concrete block manufacturers are not secretive and are quite willing for other businessmen to visit their plants, since the plants operate several hundred miles apart and are not considered to be in competition with each other: the high cost of transportation of such blocks considerably limits the operating radius of producers. ...
FCTD

Mallett v. The Queen, 92 DTC 6537, [1992] 2 CTC 229 (FCTD)

Mallett has discharged the burden of establishing that the assessment is invalid, the relevant statutory provisions must be considered. ...
FCTD

Mytting v. Canada (National Revenue), 2012 DTC 5084 [at at 6996], 2012 FC 465

The Minister considered Mr. Mytting’s complaint that he had been misled and reasonably rejected it on the record produced. ...
FCTD

Leonard v. The Queen, 96 DTC 6518, [1996] 3 CTC 265 (FCTD)

Statutory Provisions: These provisions, coming out of any number of amendments to cope with what the defendant Crown considered loop-holes, now read like something which resembles a Marseilles bouillabaisse. ...
FCTD

Kirsch Construction Ltd. v. The Queen, 88 DTC 6503, [1988] 2 CTC 338 (FCTD)

The specific endorsement of the company's insurance policy to cover this piece of equipment was obtained effective June 14, 1977 and as the cheque for the payment of the balance of the purchase price was also cleared that day at the plaintiff's bank it is reasonable to conclude that the parties considered the passage of title and risk to have occurred as of that date. ...
FCTD

The Queen v. C.I.P. Inc., 88 DTC 6005, [1988] 1 CTC 32 (FCTD)

In the Barnard case the Tax Review Board had under consideration a "23-foot all weather boat, considered as a commercial boat by the vendors". ...
FCTD

Kamel v. Canada (Attorney General), 2006 FC 490

Note that prior to April 3, 2006, the applicant was able to obtain a copy of these letters from the respondent’s counsel and that the applicant was able to refer to them in his affidavit dated April 3, 2006, filed for substantive purposes. [14] In support of his position that the transmission of February 2, 2006, was incomplete, the applicant relied on the fact that this package sent by the federal board, commission or other tribunal at issue contained nothing more than, as stated in paragraph 19 of his written submissions: Analysis... the notes, documents and recommendations of the Investigations Division regarding the identification of grounds justifying the refusal of the passport and the referral to the Minister, nor the recommendations of the Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness and the reasons or the other documents considered by the Minister. ...
FCTD

Sherman v. Canada (Canada Customs and Revenue Agency), 2006 FC 877

Therefore, she has not yet considered making accommodations beyond the Applicant's immediate office environment. [15]            Since the Return Date the Applicant has been paid as if she had worked for 20 hours per week even though she has never actually worked for more than 9 hours per week. ...
FCTD

Forest Oil Corp. v. Canada, docket T-3041-89

Unlike the situation with respect to prejudgment interest, the plaintiff cannot be considered to have delayed in seeking satisfaction of judgment since the day it was delivered. ...
FCTD

Erickson v. Canada (Customs and Revenue Agency), 2003 FCT 750

For example, penalties and interest may be waived or cancelled where they result in circumstances beyond a taxpayer's control or where they arose primarily because of actions of the Agency such as processing delays, errors in processing, materials made available by the Agency to the public which contained errors or delays by the Agency in providing information. [4]                 Section 10 of the Guidelines lists the following factors which will be considered when determining whether or not the Agency will cancel or waive interest or penalties: (a)        whether or not the taxpayer has a history of compliance with tax obligations; (b)        whether or not the taxpayer has knowingly allowed a balance to exist upon which arrears interest has accrued; (c)        whether or not the taxpayer has exercised a reasonable amount of care and has not been negligent or careless in conducting his affairs under the self assessment system; (d)        whether or not the taxpayer has acted quickly to remedy any delay or omission. [5]                 It is clear in law a decision to waive or not accrued interest is a discretionary decision in respect of which Justice Pratte stated on behalf of the Federal Court of Appeal in Barron v. ...

Pages