Search - considered

As a result, the only question in this appeal is whether he made those false statements knowingly or in circumstances amounting to gross negligence, pursuant to subsection 163(2) of the Income Tax Act. [2] [5] Counsel for the Appellant and the Respondent helpfully focused their submissions on what they considered the relevant factors under the Torres framework and the significant body of Fiscal Arbitrator penalty cases. ... This factor is not determinative and must be considered with the Torres framework as a whole. [5] [11] Mr. ...

The Minister’s agents uncertainly considered it and gave the Minister the benefit of the doubt. ... The Minister has not considered the objection as she should have done. ...

By letter issued dated December 9, 2020 [R-6], the Minister granted the Appellant’s application and considered the Notice of Objection for the 2013 taxation year as having been filed on the date of said letter. ... And even if it is assumed for a moment that the first document filed by the Appellant with the Court for these appeals, being the notice of appeal filed on June 6, 2022, could be considered as a valid application for purposes of section 166.2, the Court could not grant the Appellant the right to file a notice of objection because the condition in paragraph 166.2(5)(a) would not be met. ...

If there is no expectation of profit indeed the losses must be considered as personal or living expenses pursuant to the said definition quoted above and therefore the expenses are not deductible pursuant to 18(l)(h). ... 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. ...

It is true that this knowledge is to be considered as a significant circumstance. ... It is my considered opinion that the appellant's decision to accept wind-up and receivership of the company on December 1 had been reasonably made, both on a subjective as well as on the objective basis. ...

The relevant provision of the Income Tax Act is as follows: 118.4(1) For the purposes of subsection 6(16), sections 118.2 and 118.3 and this subsection, (a) an impairment is prolonged where it has lasted, or may reasonably be expected to last, for a continuous period of at least 12 months; (b) an individual’s ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted only where all or substantially all of the time, even with therapy and the use of appropriate devices and medication, the individual is blind or is unable (or requires an inordinate amount of time) to perform a basic activity of daily living; (c) a basic activity of daily living in relation to an individual means (i) perceiving, thinking and remembering, (ii) feeding and dressing oneself, (iii) speaking so as to be understood, in a quiet setting, by another person familiar with the individual, (iv) hearing so as to understand, in a quiet setting, another person familiar with the individual, (v) eliminating (bowel or bladder functions), or (vi) walking; and (d) for greater certainty, no other activity, including working, housekeeping or a social or recreational activity, shall be considered as a basic activity of daily living. ... It must be remembered that Parliament chose, in paragraph 118.4(1)(d), to exclude other activities, including working, housekeeping, a social or recreational activity from being considered as a basic activity of daily living. ...

The Minister of National Revenue considered that these expenditures were personal or living expenses. ... 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 Queen. [8] Folster considered a case where an employee who resided on a reserve worked at a hospital off the reserve. ... The government was in the process of designating that land as part of the reserve and had previously considered income earned working in the hospital to be exempt. ...

The Effects of the Impairment(s) are such that the individual’s ability to perform one or more basic activities of daily living is markedly restricted [10] Paragraph 118.3(1)(a.1) of the Act requires that the effects of the severe and prolonged impairment must be such that at least one of the following apply: the individual’s ability to perform a basic activity of daily living is markedly restricted; the individual’s ability to perform a basic activity of daily living would be markedly restricted if not for therapy that: is essential to sustain a vital function of the individual; is required to be administered at least two times each week for a total duration averaging not less than 14 hours a week; and cannot reasonably be expected to be of significant benefit to persons who are not so impaired; or the individual’s ability to perform more than one basic activity of daily living is significantly restricted where the cumulative effect of those restrictions is equivalent to having a marked restriction in the ability of the individual to perform a basic activity of daily living. [11] Paragraph 118.4(1)(c) of the Act provides that a basic activity of daily living means: mental functions necessary for everyday life; feeding oneself or dressing oneself; speaking so as to be understood, in a quiet setting, by another person familiar with the individual; hearing so as to understand, in a quiet setting, another person familiar with the individual; eliminating (bowel or bladder functions); or walking. [12] Paragraph 118.4(1)(c.1) of the Act provides that mental functions necessary for everyday life include: attention; concentration; memory; judgment; perception of reality; problem solving; goal setting; regulation of behavior and emotions; verbal and non-verbal comprehension; and adaptive functioning. [13] Paragraph 118.4(1)(d) of the Act provides that no other activity (apart from those listed in paragraph 118.4(1)(c) above) including working, housekeeping or a social or recreational activity is considered a basic activity of daily living. ... The Act requires both such certifications. [31] Although I am sympathetic to the extreme measures which the Appellant must incorporate into and adopt as part of her daily living to avoid exposure to a large list of chemicals so prevalent in our modern society, a certificate signed by a medical practitioner which does not provide certification as to the effects of the Appellant’s condition cannot be considered a positive medical certificate. ...

I find that the Appellant’s assertion that he intended to do so is insufficient and must be considered in the context of the ongoing litigation with his siblings and the allegation that he held the Property in trust for his parents and later his mother. [32] A reading of the minutes of settlement, signed in November 2022, supports the conclusion that the Property was held in trust because in April 2023 the Ontario Superior Court of Justice ordered that it be sold and the net proceeds of sale set aside for the benefit of the Appellant’s mother. ... Therefore, the legal expenses incurred would not be deductible even if there was a source of income. [46] A final limitation needs to be considered. ...