Search - considered

On this point, we should refer to Interpretation Bulletin IT-417R, concerns sections 9 and 18(9) and in which paragraph 3 reads as follows: To remove any uncertainty, subsection 18(9) of the Act was enacted into law on February 26, 1981, effective from December 11, 1979 and requires a taxpayer to match certain specified expenses to the taxation year to which they can reasonably be considered to relate. The department takes the view that subsection 18(9) was enacted for greater certainty and notwithstanding that it does not cover deferred charges or all types of expenses that can be prepaid, it is considered that the Income Tax Act (even as it read prior to the introduction of subsection 18(9)) always required and continues to require that all costs that could clearly be related to future periods be expensed in those periods, if they are important and if failure to defer the expense would distort the net profit not only of the year during which the expense was incurred but also of the subsequent year or years to which the benefit relates... 4.94.6(2) Counsel for the appellant commented as follows on the liquidity guarantee at pages 16 et seq. of his reply: In their second main argument, our friends argued that the expenses for the liquidity guarantee should be staggered over five (5) years. ... (The general area of what is comprehended in subparagraphs (i) and (ii) of section 11(1)(cb) is I think indicated by the scope of what is expressly excluded by subparagraphs (iii) and (iv) [at that time these subparagraphs did not include commissions and bonuses paid to agents and brokers] for the fact that it was considered expedient to expressly exclude commissions and bonuses and payment as or on account of principal or interest, to my mind shows that what is referred to as "as expense incurred in the year" in the course of issuing or selling shares or borrowing money for the purpose referred to is capable of embracing a broad class of expenditures...) and is authority for the acceptance of all expenses related to an issue or a loan. ...

This was not done, in my opinion, and I therefore need not examine the issue further. [185] In terms of taxation, in its decision in Jarvis (supra), the Supreme Court of Canada distinguished between Revenue Canada's audit and investigation functions and provided some factors to be considered in applying this distinction. ... Most surprising, however, is that he considered his donations to be a form of tax shelter and compared the amounts supposedly donated over the years at issue to amounts he subsequently invested in flow-through shares. ... Hanna was unable to demonstrate, other than by a simple statement, any sizeable donation made in the years before or after the years at issue strengthens the view whereby donations of such magnitude to the A.O.L.M. cannot reasonably be considered to be realistic for a person who has only been working for a few years, who has average income and has other obligations, such as current expenditures, parental assistance and repayment of a student loan. ...

The difficulty with that is even if assessors spent time in Vocan’s facility on preparatory activities in connection with preparing Reports, it is only the predominant part of the service- the assessment conducted off-site- that is to be considered in making the determination as to whether the supply constituted an institutional health service. ... [11] In drawing the line between “ordinary” negligence or neglect and “gross” negligence a number of factors have to be considered. ... The Court considered what was integral to the overall supply of livestock and concluded it was the buying service, thus only a single supply was provided as such service was indivisible from other services offered. [28] In Applewood Holdings Inc. v. ...

In this case there were personal elements involved such as the Appellant being involved in the business (just for fun), many of the expenses should be considered to be non-business items. [14]          With respect to the Herbalife and the jeans enterprises the Appellant was only involved in a preliminary way. ... He considered what Drozdzik told him. He was not the author of the documents except to prepare the index. ... The expenses were not reasonable and must be considered to have been personal in nature. [267]        As referred to in Stewart, supra at paragraph 63, this Court concludes that even though the Appellant had an abiding intention of making a profit from the activities, the Court is satisfied that "the activity was not carried out in accordance with objective standards of businesslike behavior". ...

Pat Paletta considered the reporting of the trades thoughtfully, obtained professional advice on the proper reporting of the trades, and relied on his longstanding and trusted accountants to prepare his returns. ... Angelo Paletta testified that his father was “a wizard with numbers” and “had a computer brain”. [203] [266] Before leaving the statute-barred issue, I have carefully considered whether the carry over of a portion of the overstated 2002 loss to the 2005 taxation year under section 111 of the Act was attributable to carelessness or neglect on the part of Mr. ... Since it is a subjective test, the personal attributes of the individual may be considered in determining whether the individual is wilfully blind. [116] On the other hand, the “gross negligence” standard is an objective test. ...

There is no suggestion in his reasons that it could have been considered an invitation to enter without showing her the search warrant. [67] Both RCMP officers then entered the house to satisfy themselves there were no threats to the investigators’ safety. The CRA Criminal Investigations’ investigators then entered and search the house and seized a number of documents. [68] Judge Gouge then considered the requirements of section 29(1) of the Criminal Code which provides: “It is the duty of everyone who executes a process or warrant to have it with him, where it is feasible to do so, and to produce it when requested to do so” « Quiconque exécute un acte judiciaire ou un mandat est tenu de l’avoir sur soi, si la chose est possible, et de le produire lorsque demande lui en est faite » [69] When asked by Judge Gouge why she did not give Ms. ... Informer privilege precluded the McCarties having this information. [4] The possibility of amicus curiae was also considered, but was found to be precluded by valid precedent. [5] Note Mr. ...

The appellant never considered the money deposited into her bank account as her property and in that respect she is not the “transferee” of the alleged “transfer of property;”   16.     ...

After Justice Webb provided a review of the relevant jurisprudence in LeCaine, his summary referred only to the probability or improbability of an event as a factor to be considered by a judge in assessing the evidence but not to any degree of heightened onus within the standard of the balance of probabilities itself, as Appellant Counsel proposed. ...

He considered it to be a conclusion of law "that has no place among the Minister's assumed facts". [25]       I agree that legal statements or conclusions have no place in the recitation of the Minister's factual assumptions. ...

At paragraphs 4, 5 and 6 of his reasons, Justice Fournier writes as follows:   [T ranslation]   [4]        For instance, in the case of civil liability litigation, the written or verbal offer to pay a sum of money cannot be used against the person who made the offer and as such is considered covered by the solicitor-client privilege. [5]        However, in the course of negotiations, counsel’s very mandate for settlement purposes is to state his or her client’s position. ...