Search - considered

Her Majesty the Queen, supra, the amount owing was considered as a buy out. ... In those cases, as here, the important point is not whether the amounts may be considered to be capital, or capital in nature, but, whether the Court is satisfied that the payments were made to relieve a past obligation and therefore did not qualify as periodic payments within the meaning of paragraph 60(b) of the Act. ...

By letter dated April 5, 2005, the Minister advised the Appellant that her application for an extension of time to file an objection was granted and that the objection was considered to have been filed on April 5, 2005. 11.        ... Section 122.62 of the Income Tax Act reads: Eligible individuals 122.62. (1) For the purposes of this subdivision, a person may be considered to be an eligible individual in respect of a particular qualified dependant at the beginning of a month only if the person has, no later than 11 months after the end of the month, filed with the Minister a notice in prescribed form containing prescribed information. 122.62.(2) Extension for notices (2) The Minister may at any time extend the time for filing a notice under subsection 122.62(1). 122.62.(3) Exception (3) Where at the beginning of 1993 a person is an eligible individual in respect of a qualified dependant, subsection 122.62(1) does not apply to the person in respect of the qualified dependant if the qualified dependant was an eligible child (within the meaning assigned by subsection 122.2(2) because of subparagraph (a)(i) of the definition "eligible child" in that subsection) of the individual for the 1992 taxation year. 122.62.(4) Person ceasing to be an eligible individual (4) Where during a particular month a person ceases to be an eligible individual in respect of a particular qualified dependant (otherwise than because of the qualified dependant attaining the age of 18 years), the person shall notify the Minister of that fact before the end of the first month following the particular month. 122.62.(5) Death of cohabiting spouse (5) Where (a) before the end of a particular month the cohabiting spouse or common-law partner of an eligible individual in respect of a qualified dependant dies, and (b) the individual so elects, before the end of the eleventh month after the particular month, in a form that is acceptable to the Minister, for the purpose of determining the amount deemed under subsection 122.61(1) to be an overpayment arising in any month after the particular month on account of the individual's liability under this Part for the base taxation year in relation to the particular month, subject to any subsequent election under subsection 122.62(6) or 122.62(7), the individual's adjusted income for the year is deemed to be equal to the individual's income for the year. ...

If I am to accept the Canada Revenue Agency's view that a professional organization may be considered an educational institution, I would want to be satisfied that it is an organization that at least is empowered by law to certify or license its members to practice the profession, examines its candidate for memberships, and regulates the conduct of its members. ... The preamble of paragraph 26 states: The following items that relate to a particular program (whether identified separately or included as course or subject fees) are considered eligible tuition fees: [emphasis added] [19]     For the purpose of this appeal, only ancillary fees "that are paid to" an "educational institution" referred to in subparagraph (1)(a)(i) are eligible for a tuition credit. [20]     There is no suggestion that the New York State Board of Law Examiners and National Conference of Bar Examiners in Iowawere universities providing courses leading to a degree; these fees are ineligible for a tuition tax credit. [21]     Even if the fees were paid in Canada to a Canadian body, this Court has previously found that such examination fees are not eligible for a tuition credit as law examiners do not provide post-secondary school level courses, nor are they ancillary fees allowable under paragraph 118.5(1)(c): see Arrioja v. ...

Sections 9.1 and 9.2 of the Employment Insurance Regulations read: 9.1        Where a person's earnings are paid on an hourly basis, the person is considered to have worked in insurable employment for the number of hours that the person actually worked and for which the person was remunerated. 9.2        Subject to section 10, where a person's earnings or a portion of a person's earnings for a period of insurable employment remains unpaid for the reasons described in subsection 2(2) of the Insurable Earnings and Collection of Premiums Regulations, the person is deemed to have worked in insurable employment for the number of hours that the person actually worked in the period, whether or not the person was remunerated. ... I considered whether, under these circumstances, it would be more appropriate to hold my judgment in abeyance, pending the final disposition of Dr. ...

Eco Tech wanted to be able to offer harvesters employment that would be insurable under the Act and considered the full-time harvesters as employees, creating payroll records for them, making deductions from the amounts that were paid to them and providing records of employment to them at the end of the season. ... Part-time harvesters were not considered by Eco Tech to be employees and they were not guaranteed a market for their hemlock. ...

As explained in Income Tax Technical News No. 24, the legal costs related to collecting support payments are considered deductible because the legal fees relate to the collection of a pre‑existing right. ... But an expenditure incurred in recovering an amount owing under a pre-existing right is a "current" expense and may therefore be deducted.   18        Conversely, the expenses incurred by the payer of support (either to prevent it from being established or increased, or to decrease or terminate it) cannot be considered to have been incurred for the purpose of earning income, and the courts have never recognized any right to the deduction of these expenditures (see, for example, Bayer, supra).  ...   34       ... ...

  [8]      The Respondent submits that the amounts paid by the Appellant were payments for employment recruitment and counselling services and cannot be considered an amount paid by the employee to obtain the right to acquire the shares. ... Magee, while correctly acknowledging that the context and purpose of a statutory provision must always be considered, comment that "[i]t would introduce intolerable uncertainty into the Income Tax Act if clear language in a detailed provision of the Act were to be qualified by unexpressed exceptions derived from a court's view of the object and purpose of the provision": Principles of Canadian Income Tax Law 2nd ed., 1997 at pp. 475-76. ...

For her part, Defina testified that she considered the 1996 agreement to be legally binding at the time ... More specifically, there was no new commencement date and second, the amount in issue cannot be considered to be a lump sum payment within the meaning of the Act.   ...

That subsection reads: 152(4.3) Notwithstanding subsections (4), (4.1) and (5), where the result of an assessment or a decision on an appeal is to change a particular balance of a taxpayer for a particular taxation year, the Minister may, or where the taxpayer so requests in writing, shall, before the later of the expiration of the normal reassessment period in respect of a subsequent taxation year and the end of the day that is one year after the day on which all rights of objection and appeal expire or are determined in respect of the particular year, reassess the tax, interest or penalties payable, or redetermine an amount deemed to have been paid or to have been an overpayment, under this Part by the taxpayer in respect of the subsequent taxation year, but only to the extent that the reassessment or redetermination can reasonably be considered to relate to the change in the particular balance of the taxpayer for the particular year. 152(4.3) Malgré les paragraphes (4), (4.1) et (5), lorsqu'une cotisation ou une décision d'appel a pour effet de modifier un solde donné applicable à un contribuable pour une année d'imposition donnée, le ministre peut ou, si le contribuable en fait la demande par écrit, doit, avant le dernier en date du jour d'expiration de la période normale de nouvelle cotisation pour une année d'imposition subséquente et de la fin du jour qui tombe un an après l'extinction ou la détermination de tous les droits d'opposition ou d'appel relatifs à l'année donnée, établir une nouvelle cotisation à l'égard de l'impôt, des intérêts ou des pénalités payables, ou déterminer de nouveau un montant réputé avoir été payé, ou payé en trop, en vertu de la présente partie par le contribuable pour l'année subséquente, mais seulement dans la mesure où il est raisonnable de considérer que la nouvelle cotisation ou la détermination se rapporte à la modification du solde donné applicable au contribuable pour l'année donnée. ... iii)                if so, can the reassessment reasonably be considered to relate to that change in the particular balance for the earlier year? ...

. $1,121.38 divided by the hourly wage of $29.03, considering that a part of an hour is considered an entire hour. [4]    In addition, at the hearing, the Minister consented to a judgment containing the following terms:        (a)         insurable hours: 53, from April 24 to April 30, 2004; and        (b)         insurable earnings: $1,479.29. ... For these reasons, he believes that he remained employed by the Payor in insurable employment. [17]At the hearing, the Appellant said that he no longer considered himself bound by a contract with the Payor because the Payor violated the terms of the contract, which is what precipitated his repatriation request of April 30, 2004. ...