Search - considered

When apprised of this testimony, Pratt indicated that this was a taxable supply (apparently not disputed by the Appellant) and that had she been aware of that fact at the time of the reassessment, she would not have reversed that portion of the GST remitted which she believed reflected employment income. [5]      At the conclusion of the evidence and after due consideration, MacMillan considered the Appellant's position with respect to its appeal and informed the Court that given the circumstances: "I think you should throw it out, Your Honour". [6]      Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. ...

Nonetheless, the Appellant did not report either sum in his 1995 income tax return, nor did he file an amended 1995 return, although at all times he considered them wages and actively continued to take that position throughout 1996. [5]      It remains his position but he believes that his employer should have paid the withholdings that represent the difference between $4,000.00 per month and approximately $3,000.00 per month. [6]      Thus, on the evidence, the Appellant deliberately and knowingly failed to report the income in question contrary to section 150 of the Income Tax Act. [7]      Therefore he is liable for the penalties assessed under section 163(2) of the Income Tax Act. [8]      The appeal is dismissed. ...

ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION: [6] This issue was considered by Judge Rip in Soper v. ...

This is a benefit for which the company pays a monthly premium to the Maritime Life Insurance Company and is, under Revenue Canada rules, considered a taxable benefit. ...

  (1) There shall be included in computing the income of a taxpayer for a taxation year as income from an office or employment such of the following amounts as are applicable:   (a) the value of board, lodging and other benefits of any kind whatever received or enjoyed by the taxpayer in the year in respect of, in the course of, or by virtue of an office or employment,   [4]               Unfortunately the Appellant’s former employer did not inform the Appellant that he would be considered to have a benefit from employment in relation to this trip nor was this benefit from employment included on his T4 slip. ...

ANALYSIS [8]            The Appellant testified that in the 1998 and 1999 taxation years he incurred various expenses in an attempt to establish a profitable snowmobile rental business. [9]            I have carefully considered the Appellant's testimony and I have concluded that the following additional expenses should be allowed: AMOUNTS TO BE ALLOWED Expenses:                                                               1998                                      1999                 Advertising                                                            $ 42.80                 Meals and Entertainment                    -                                          $ 149.45                 Office Expenses                                     1,214.95                 Supplies                                                  1,238.72                 Travel                                                                      75.82                     503.05 [10]          With respect to capital cost allowance the following items should be added to the C.C.A. ...

The disbursements are justified and considered necessary and reasonable costs for the conduct of this case. ...

., [1994] 1 C.T.C. 2562, in which (then) Associate Chief Judge Christie disallowed fees claimed, and addressed the issue of who could be considered “counsel” before the Court as defined in the Act and Rules. ...

The Court, having considered the provisions of Rule 147 of the Tax Court of Canada Rules (General Procedure) is satisfied that a proper disposition of these matters is to order one set of costs, in the appeals of John Frank Krmpotic (2006‑2354(IT)G) and 507582 B.C.  ...

Terek will not be barred from having this issue properly considered in respect to his father’s assessment and in respect to his own assessments for later years. ...