Search - considered

The Honourable the Minister of National Revenue having reconsidered the assessment and having considered the facts and reasons set forth in the Notice of Objection hereby confirms the said assessment as having been made in accordance with the provisions of the Act and in particular on the ground that In that case at hand the words following “and in particular on the ground that” are: “the taxpayer’s income has been properly determined under the provisions of sections 3 and 4 and subsections 9(1) and 248(1) of the Act.” ... The Queen, [1983] C.T.C. 90; 83 D.T.C. 5095, issue estoppel was considered by the Federal Court—Trial Division. ...

The respondent, applying section 31 of the Income Tax Act, considered these losses to be farm losses, and allowed only $5,000. ... In addition, he considered horse-racing an activity exclusive to the rich. ...

In addition each individual acknowledged in his release, and agreed, that "for the purposes of the Income Tax Act of Canada, the payment herein made to him by Oriole Oil and Gas Ltd shall be considered as income from employment or office with Oriole Oil & Gas Ltd (sic) and that such payment shall be considered as a deductible expense from income of Oriole Oil and Gas Ltd”. ...

In Commissioner of Internal Revenue First Security Bank of Utah, N.A. (1972), 405 U.S. 394, the United States Supreme Court considered the application of section 482 of the United States Internal Revenue Code, which allows the Commissioner of Internal Revenue (the “Commissioner”) to allocate income among controlled corporations. ... Factors which I have considered important in arriving at my decision are the following: 1. ...

The respondent argued that the amounts given did not constitute true charitable gifts but rather adoption fees considered as personal expenses of the appellant. ... An initial amount of $9,250, which the appellant considered to be a gift, was paid by cheque to the order of the Office of the treasurer in September 1991. ...

., represented by Roger Tremblay; (b) the purchase offer of December 30, 1986 differed in several respects from the offer of sale of September 29, 1987, in particular as to price, conditions, terms of payment and so on; (c) the offer of sale of September 29, 1987 was not regarded by the parties in question simply as a modified version of the offer of December 30, 1986: on the contrary, both parties concerned considered in their pleadings in connection with the action brought by Marcel Bédard et al. that the offer of December 30, 1986 should be resolved, in the plaintiffs’ view, and was null and void, in the defendants’ view. ... Appeal dismissed. 1 l Although Classes 31 and 32 of Schedule II of the Regulations were mentioned in the Reply to the Notice of Appeal, the parties admitted that only Class 31 should be considered by the Court. 2 It will be seen below that this entity has never had any legal existence. 3 ^This is how the plaintiffs are styled. 4 depreciation deduction. 5 ^Scarborough, Carswell, 1994, at p. 20. 6 These versions are those which existed before the 5th Supplement to the Revised Statutes of Canada, 1985 came into effect. ...

Accordingly, I have reviewed additional examples of case law which I considered of some relevance. ... I do not believe that farming operations can be considered as having started at the time the idea or the intention of farming was conceived, not at any stage prior to the actual operations of the farm. ...

On the authority of subparagraph 52(c)(ii) of the Federal Court Act which gives the Court of Appeal the discretionary power, in the case of an appeal other than an appeal from the Trial Division, to ‘refer the matter back for determination in accordance with such directions as it considers to be appropriate’, I have reached the conclusion that the new argument raised before us by the appellant with respect to the cost amount should be considered by this Court, but that in the special circumstances of this case, where arguably more complete evidence is required, it would be appropriate to have it determined by the Tax Court of Canada on the evidence that is in the record or on such further evidence as it may allow. ... Each of these conditions, actual or supposed, will now be considered in turn. ...

It is my considered opinion that that phrase includes an assessment made under clause (10) of section 227.1. ... The Appellant must be considered as an inside director and the onus on him as set forth in the Federal Court of Appeal decision in Soperis an onerous one. ...

The appellant’s position is that if the activities carried on outside of Canada satisfy the criteria in section 2900 of the Regulations independently of the work that is done in Canada, then they are carried on outside of Canada; if they require the work in Canada to be considered SR&ED (i.e. if it is only by their integration into the project as a whole that they become SR&ED) then they must form part of an SR&ED project that is carried on in Canada. ... Should the component parts when considered alone fail to meet the requirements of Regulation 2900, then neither of subsections 37(1) or (2) would apply as the activities would not constitute SR&ED. [40] I would also note that there is nothing in the language or meaning assigned to the relevant provisions to suggest that the determination of where an activity is carried on should be made by reference solely to the cost of performing the activities. ...