Search - considered

The Respondent disallowed the deduction of these travel expenses on the grounds that the Appellant did not meet the conditions required by paragraph 8(1)(h) or 8(1)(h.1) of the Income Tax Act (the "Act"), namely of being ordinarily required to carry on the duties of the office or employment away from the employer's place of business or in different places, and being required under the contract of employment to pay his travel expenses incurred in the performance of the duties of the office or employment. [2]      In making and confirming the assessments at issue, the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") considered, specifically, the following facts [1]: a)          the Appellant is employed as a longshoreman; b)          the Appellant is an employee of the Maritime Employers' Association (hereinafter "M.E.A. ... There are at least two phrases in 8(1)(h.1), that need to be considered for purposes of these appeals. ... In such a situation, the employee is considered as carrying on his duties at different places [30]. ...

Justice Tardif used that approach to rule that the right of use should not be taken into account because the time right before the transfer took place should be the time considered. ... Can the amount she paid be considered as part of the consideration she had paid for the undivided half of the residence? ... In addition, that approach would make it impossible to apply section 160 because, if we considered the legal obligation created by section 160 as being part of the consideration paid by Ms.  ...

Another matter considered was financing second mortgages respecting residences built by a large construction company in Orange County, California, called Broadmore Homes. ... " Early in 1984 the possibility of acquiring part of Canada Permanent U.K Ltd., a mortgage company in London, England, owned by Canada Permanent Mortgage Company, was considered. ... They went by the board with the enactment of Statutes of Canada 1970-71-72, c. 63 which came into force on January 1,1972. [5] By the time the definition of personal corporation no longer featured in income tax legislation there existed a number of reported cases in which the words “active financial, commercial or industrial business" were considered. ...

The value of the land so determined was considered a constant. However, for the purpose of adjustments to account for different lot sizes, 50% of the value per square foot was used on the theory that the back half of a large lot is worth one-half the value of the front half. ... Gennaro, [31] a decision of the Ontario Unified Family Court that considered whether a beneficiary’s interest in the residue of an estate constituted an interest in the estate’s assets. ... Subsection 104(1) states, in part: 104.(1) Reference to trust or estate- In this Act, a reference to a trust or estate (in this subdivision referred to as a “trust”) shall, unless the context otherwise requires, be read to include a reference to the trustee, executor, administrator, liquidator of a succession, heir or other legal representative having ownership or control of the trust property... [61]         As a result of subsection 104(1) of the ITA, the Estate is considered to be a trust for the purposes of Subdivision k of Division B in Part I of the ITA. [33] Subsection 104(2) of the ITA in turn deems the Estate to be an individual in respect of the property of the Estate. ...

However, if it may reasonably be considered that the transaction would not result directly or indirectly in an abuse of any provision having regard to the Act read as a whole, the GAAR does not apply.   ... In the series of transactions being considered, the capital gain realized by the taxpayer at the time of the internal rollover is indeed bona fide. ... In this context, I believe that, in addition to the transaction details, the object, spirit or purpose of section 84.1 of the Act must be considered to determine whether the GAAR applies to the transactions at issue ...

I shall reproduce it in its entirety. [3] 1)          The Appellant is a corporation with an address at 5 th Floor, Cathedral Place, 925 West Georgia Street, Vancouver, British Columbia. 2)          The Appellant is a successor by amalgamation to MacMillan Bloedel Limited (the "Company"). 3)          In 1998 the Company, in the ordinary course of its forestry business, made payments totalling $14,313,726.30 to non-resident service providers, and withheld 15% from payments the Company considered to have been made to non-residents for services rendered in Canada. ... The Federal Court of Appeal has considered such a situation in two recent cases, British Columbia Ferry Corporation v. ... Strayer J.A., writing for a unanimous Court, considered whether the Court could, in effect, rewrite the Regulation in a way that would render it intra vires. ...

He considered the annual rental, costs of insurance, interest and upkeep. ... These expenses were not claimed in the Appellant’s 1990 income tax return or by any other entity because he considered it to be his principal residence and it did not matter. [59] Likewise, the expenses on the trade-in property were not claimed because there was no reasonable expectation of profit or else it was part of the Panorama property transaction, his principal residence and therefore, not deductible. [60] With respect to the McKenzie Pub and Bowling Lanes the Appellant said that he had incurred the bad debts of $39,521 in 1988 and $132,146 in 1991 as a result of the monies owed to him with respect to his rental operation of a property located at 101 Stewart Drive, McKenzie, B.C. and the Minister was wrong in not allowing these deductions. [61] He testified that himself and Peter Shields took over the agreement to buy the property which was the subject matter of a foreclosure action with Federal Business Development Bank, (F.B.D.B.). ... The Appellant considered legal action but it was obvious that this would have proven fruitless. [221] There was no evidence to contradict the conclusion of the Appellant that this debt was uncollectible. ...

There was no discussion with Kurtz about being placed on a payroll which did not concern Martin since he considered his status would be that of employee because he was not bidding on any specific job and was not providing his services on any basis other than at the agreed hourly rate of $25 for which he would receive payment twice a month ...   [14]          In cross-examination by the Agent for the Appellant, Henderson stated that when he accepted to work for $25 per hour, he had not considered that he would provide his services on any basis other than as an employee as he was not – at that point – operating Aces High nor any other business entity. ... Wiebe was providing his services to others – including Weststone – at that time but had not registered with GST nor had he considered that he was carrying on his own business. ...

He considered Commercial Credit Corp. v. Harry D. Shields Ltd. [8] which confirmed that while the right of distress is not a lien, a lien occurs when there is actual or constructive taking of possession by the party with a right of distress. ... We agree with the trial Judge that a distress, when made, confers on the landlord a lien within the meaning of s. 3(1)(a) of the Personal Property Security Act notwithstanding that it has other legal incidents. [10] [31]          Hinds J. also considered the case of Bank of Montreal v. ... On the other hand, the Supreme Court of Canada held in the Piggott case that redeemable transfers (assignments of book debts) were not a sufficient alienation to avoid the application of subsection 317(3). [16] In Piggott, dealing with a general assignment of book debts, Cory J. considered that a secured creditor was a person with a "security interest in the property of another person" which is a requirement in the definition of "secured creditor". ...

Apparently, the non-capital losses were disallowed and the Appellant re-filed on the basis that section 80 did not apply, giving rise to this appeal. [3]            The Appellant submits that no portion of the $16 million satisfies the requirements in the definition of "commercial debt obligation". [4]            Included in the $16 million are three separate debts; $9 million, $4 million and $2.2. million. [6] The history of each must be considered. ... While the Appellant's position is well taken, again for the purpose of completeness, I have considered these submissions together with the Appellant's reply and found them of minimal assistance. ... Further, the allocation of a portion of the debt to Provincial cannot be considered a complete substitution of Provincial for the original debtors as Shoctor was not fully released from his debt obligation. ...