Search - considered

Dupont’s version must also be considered. During the periods at issue, he worked mainly for the Société d’exploitation des ressources de la vallée. ... Savard and Gina Thériault went “very calmly”; he did not complain about the way it was conducted. [28] Furthermore, the appellant acknowledged that the version of her work for the payer attributed to her by Serge Picard, the investigator from the Department of Human Resources Development, differed from the version given at the hearing. [29] All things considered, I prefer Mr. ...

  [15]         The Province of British Columbia considered the Appellant to have been resident in British Columbia in 2008 for the purposes of its Medical Services Plan. ...   [29]         The question of the meaning of “principal place of residence” in paragraph 6(6)(a) has previously been considered by this Court. ...

  [4]              Additional materials (although not necessarily relevant nor properly produced at the Hearing by the Appellants) were, with the consent of the Respondent, received and considered by the Court subsequent to the Hearing. ...   [18]         In deciding this procedural matter, the Court considered the arguments of the parties and indicated its strong inclination that the request for the amendment to insert the section 8 Charter violation arose primarily due to the negligence of the Appellants’ agent in preparing his Notice of Appeal. ...

Issues [2] The issues in these appeals are: (1) Can the Appellant's home be considered a "nursing home" for the purposes of paragraphs 118.2(2)(b) and (d) of the Income Tax Act (the " Act ")? If the answer to number (1) is in the negative, then alternatively: (2) Can the Appellant's home be considered an "other place" for the purposes of paragraph 118.2(2)(e) of the Act? ...

Welch carefully considered how to proceed each month and decided, as each return became due, that they could not complete the returns and swear to the truth of their content, considering the missing information ... These circumstances must be taken into account, but must be considered against an objective "reasonably prudent person" standard. ...

  [16]         However, in paragraph 39, Justice Mainville recognized that a director’s particular circumstances are to be considered and measured against a reasonably prudent person standard:   An objective standard does not however entail that the particular circumstances of a director are to be ignored. These circumstances must be taken into account, but must be considered against an objective “reasonably prudent person “standard” ...

The home has never been offered for sale nor for rent, and has never been left vacant. [6]              The Appellant’s new housing rebate application was turned down because, per the Canada Revenue Agency (the “CRA”) letter turning down the rebate request, “for rebate purposes, your house in Canada can only be considered a secondary place of residence since your status while in Canada is a visitor”. [7]              The CRA notice of confirmation disallowing the Appellant’s objection similarly concludes that the Markham home is a secondary residence because the Appellant continues to reside in the United Kingdom. [8]              This is the position that was maintained at the hearing notwithstanding the evidence. [9]              The Respondent’s position is wrong. ... Analysis [21]         As noted above, the CRA letter denying the rebate application turns it down on the basis that the Appellant’s house in Canada can only be considered as a secondary place of residence since his status while in Canada when he agreed to buy it and when he moved in was that of a visitor. ...

Smith testified that, if Jazz had not paid for the parking pass, he would have considered other options. While he stated that he would have considered other options, he did not mention what they were, with the exception of the option that consisted of paying for a parking pass out of his own pocket. ...

The Law [24]         Paragraph 11 of the PASF states: “ The Appellant used the proxy method of claiming overhead costs for its SR&ED claim in the 2010 Taxation Year. ” Counsel for the Appellant confirmed that the parties are referring to the election that is made under clause 37(8)(a)(ii)(B) and subsection 37(10) of the Act. [25]         With respect to salary and wages, since the Appellant made the so-called proxy election, it was only entitled, under subclause 37(8)(a)(ii)(B)(IV), to include as an expenditure on or in respect of scientific research and experimental development “ that portion of an expenditure made in respect of an expense incurred in the year for salary or wages of an employee who is directly engaged in scientific research and experimental development in Canada that can reasonably be considered to relate to such work having regard to the time spent by the employee thereon... ”. ... As a result, 100% of those wages can reasonably be considered to relate to SR&ED and they represent an expenditure on or in respect of SR&ED. [32]         Counsel for the Respondent argued that, if I accept that the Appellant paid the $38,880 of wages solely for SR&ED, then Gary McCrea and Tom McCrea did not receive any compensation for the significant time they spent “ performing director or management activities ” for the Appellant. [33]         I do not accept this conclusion. ...

That issue can now be considered by the Court. Background [5]              What follows is a short summary of the evidence as previously reviewed in the oral reasons delivered on March 1, 2017. ... [14]         As indicated above, following the reasoning of this Court in Melanson, supra, the Applications to extend the time to file notices of objection were adjourned sine die to allow the Respondent to consider whether the letter of September 10, 2015 could be considered as valid applications. ...