Search - considered

.), concluded as follows:... the fact that the amounts received may have been intended for the education of the appellants' daughters does not deprive the recipient of the requisite discretion for these payments to be considered as allowances within the meaning of subsection 56(12) of the Act.... [11]     As mentioned by counsel for the respondent, there seems to be two approaches followed by the courts on this point. ...

That is so because the calculation was done under the old rules and the maintenance payments, paid and received, take into account the fact that they would be considered as reportable income by one person (the Appellant in this case) and deductible by the other person. ...

(w)        for the reporting periods ending between: (i)          January 1, 1996 to December 31, 1996, no more than 82% of the supplies acquired by the Appellant were for use in the course of the Appellant's commercial activities; (ii)         January 1, 1997 to December 31, 1997, no more than 30% of the supplies acquired by the Appellant were for use in the course of the Appellant's commercial activities; (iii)        January 1, 1998 to December 31, 1998 no more than 11.40% of the supplies acquired by the Appellant were for use in the course of the Appellant's commercial activities; (iv)        January 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999, no more than 5% of the supplies acquired by the Appellant were for use in the course of the Appellant's commercial activities; (v)         January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2000, no more than 10.40% of the supplies acquired by the Appellant were for use in the course of the Appellant's commercial activities; (vi)        July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2001, no more than 6% of the supplies acquired by the Appellant were for use in the course of the Appellant's commercial activities; (vii)       July 1, 2001 to March 31, 2002, no more than 2% of the supplies acquired by the Appellant were for use in the course of the Appellant's commercial activities. [9]      The Appellant took no specific objection to the Minister's application of the administrative policy that any percentage in excess of 90 is considered to be "substantially all". ...

Goyette’s testimony, which was not supported by any documentary evidence or independent and credible testimony, could not be considered as credible and plausible under the circumstances and did not overturn the presumed validity of the assessment. ...

The Appellant in this case was considered the foster family.   [7]      According to Mr.  ...

Rather, they acted as, and considered themselves, individual entrepreneurs.   7(r), (s), (t)  Are the subject of the dispute ...

(i)         When she was entered on the payroll full-time, the appellant was receiving a weekly fixed salary of $500 without the hours she actually worked being considered.   ...

The BCCA considered the tax implications of restoring the April 1996 Order and clearly indicated that the deduction/inclusion status of the support payments was to apply to "future" payments, not "all" or "past" or "from April 1998 through February 2000" payments. [7]      There were several incidents that confused the issue. ...

The FMV of $225,000 attributed to each of the two buildings includes taxes, as a result of which the before-tax value is relatively close to the value revealed by the appellant's statements. [23]     The savings realized by the appellant's taking charge of the work site, the amount of the mortgage-backed loan obtained and the relevance of the vast majority of comparables considered by the appraisers are decisive factors in support of the FMV of $225,000 assigned to each of the buildings. [24]     As to the penalties, it was adduced in evidence that, a few years earlier, the appellant had experienced a completely similar situation in which he had been assessed in comparable circumstances. ...

Bell   Appearances:   For the Appellant: The Appellant herself   Counsel for the Respondent: Craig Maw____________________________________________________________________   ORDER             UPON application for an order extending the time within which an appeal to this Court may be instituted in respect of each of the applicant's 1998, 1999 and 2000 taxation years;                     AND the Court having considered the submissions, both oral and written, of the parties;             IT IS ORDERED, for the reasons set forth in the Reasons for Order attached hereto, that the application be dismissed for those three taxation years.             ...