Search - considered

That is the issue being appealed; namely, whether the Minister of National Revenue (the “Minister”) correctly determined that the Appellant was not the “eligible individual” entitled to receive the CCTB in respect of her son for the periods under appeal. [2] The Statutory Provisions [7]      The term “eligible individual” is defined in section 122.6 of the Act as follows:   "eligible individual" in respect of a qualified dependant at any time means a person who at that time (a) resides with the qualified dependant,   (b) is the parent of the qualified dependant who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant,   […]   (h)  prescribed factors shall be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing;   [8]      The prescribed factors referred to in paragraph (h) to be considered in the determination of which parent meets the qualification in paragraph (b) are set out in Regulation 6302 as follows:   6302. ... g)                  Following the request the Minister issued a questionnaire to the Appellant and Stephanie Byrne;   h)                  The Appellant did not return the completed questionnaire, and Stephanie Byrne returned the same indicating that the child lived part time with her and that she considered herself to be the person primarily responsible for the care and upbringing of the child for the periods he lived with her;   i)                    Based upon the request for the CCTB and the return of the questionnaire the Minister issued the letters of determination on January 18, 2008 advising the appellant that there had been a change in eligible children and that she had been overpaid:               i)          $2,730 for the base year 2004 and period July 2005 to June 2006;   ii)                  $2,975 for the base year 2005 and period July 2006 to June 2007; and   iii)                $1,520 for the base year 2006 and period July 2007 to December 2007. [11]     The assumption in paragraph 6(h) of the Reply raises some definitional questions and concerns over the status of Stephanie B. as an eligible individual. ... I have no reservation in concluding that to be the case. [21]     Indeed, from the evidence I have heard and considering the factors to be considered under Regulation 6302, I could well find that she never gave up her responsibility as the primary caregiver to her son even when he lived under his father’s roof. [22]     This leads me to consider whether the roof under which the child lives at a point in time need be the determinative factor in establishing with whom the child resides at that point in time. [23]     The requirement in paragraph (a) of the definition of eligible individual requires that the parent reside with the child on the first day of the month. ...

The Queen, 2002 DTC 6969, set out a two‑stage approach for determining if an activity may be considered a source of income:   a.       ... However, where the nature of the taxpayer’s venture contains elements which suggest that it could be considered a hobby or other personal pursuit, the venture will be considered a source of income only if it is undertaken in a commercial manner. ... A reasonable expectation of profit is no more than a single factor, among a number of others, to be considered at this stage of the analysis. ...

One factor to be considered is whether or not the alleged separate supply can be realistically omitted from the overall supply. ... Whether the services are rendered under a single contract, or for a single undivided consideration, are matters to be considered, but for the reasons given above are not conclusive. ... Whether the services are rendered under a single contract, or for a single undivided consideration, are matters to be considered but are not conclusive. ...

Neville considered herself a 'student' for the courses she was taking attempting to deduct, the amount there was understandable. ... Where a training or educational course results in a lasting benefit to the taxpayer, the costs incurred in connection with the course are considered to be capital in nature. ... A lasting benefit to the taxpayer is considered to occur where a new skill or qualification for a business is acquired. ...

When can two persons be considered as living in a conjugal relationship? ... Obviously the weight to be accorded the various elements or factors to be considered in determining whether an opposite‑sex couple is in a conjugal relationship will vary widely and almost infinitely.  ... Mongeon did no social activities together, did not visit each other's families, did not introduce themselves as partners, and were not considered partners.   6.       ...

One factor to be considered is whether or not the alleged separate supply can be realistically omitted from the overall supply. ... It must be considered whether in substance and reality the collection and disposal service are so intertwined and interdependent that they must be supplied together. ... Whether the services are rendered under a single contract, or for a single undivided consideration, are matters to be considered but are not conclusive. ...

.”), and submits its returns quarterly;   (b)        during the period in question, the Appellant claimed and obtained ITCs totalling $187,670.00, which corresponds to the whole of the GST paid on the goods and services acquired by the Appellant in the course of its business;   (c)        the audit conducted by the Minister showed that the business carried on by the Appellant is not carried on in its entirety within the framework of commercial activities;   (d)        indeed, the business carried on by the Appellant involves the provision of services consisting in the solicitation of applications for the credit cards of financial institutions and major stores, these being supplies considered to be exempt under the E.T.A., and the provision of long-distance and sub-contract services, which supplies are considered to be taxable under the E.T.A.;   (e)        the supplies made by the Appellant during the period in question were accordingly analysed by the Minister to determine the amount of taxable supplies and the amount of exempt supplies;   (f)         following the calculation of the amount of the exempt supplies made by the Appellant during the period in question, adjustments of $166,312.07  to the ITCs claimed and initially obtained were made in calculating the Appellant's net tax on the ground that the goods and services were not acquired in the course of commercial activities;   (g)        following the analysis of the Appellant’s supporting documentation, adjustments of $523.46 were made to the ITCs in calculating the Appellant's net tax on the ground that the Appellant was not the recipient of the goods ... In short, we are firmly convinced that the status of ‘ financial services business’ which the Department has given us clearly does not reflect reality because, as we said earlier, we do not perform any function that can be considered to be a ‘ financial service’. ... In any event, he considered the letter to be incorrect.   [20]     The date on which Policy Statement P‑239 was issued was January 30, 2002.   ...

The Minister also considered that the appellant was able to work on weekends or at night according to her own needs and those of her spouse who was the sole owner of the payor. ... The Minister also considered that the appellant had not been replaced when her first period of employment ended on November 24, 2001 prior to the birth of her son the following month. The Minister also considered that the home office was not visited by clients of Diesel and that a shop was rented in July, 2003 to enable the company to perform bigger jobs as well as vehicle inspections. ...

Each supply would be considered independently for tax purposes. A single consideration paid for a multiple supply must be apportioned among the separate supplies. ... Whether the services are rendered under a single contract, or for a single undivided consideration, are matters to be considered but are not conclusive. ... While the burden is on the Appellant, even the Respondent's counsel acknowledged that if I found a multiple supply (which he argued against), then some allocation to fresh foods would be justified. [20]     Having considered probable food consumption patterns, I believe that 40% of the fresh food costs is a conservative allocation of what can reasonably be attributed to use at the remote camps. ...

  [22]     What constitutes a "contract of service" has been considered by the Courts many times, often in the context of distinguishing the relationship from a "contract for service". ... The Supreme Court of Canada also considered the issues in 671122 Ontario Ltd. v. ... However, if he had considered it, it is apparent that, from the employee's standpoint, the latter were not in any way integrated into the employer's business ...