Search - considered
Results 131 - 140 of 917 for considered
T Rev B decision
M v Donna Rae Limited v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2333, [1980] DTC 1284
Each case must be considered on its own facts. The lobster traps were capital property, being in the nature of fixed capital rather than circulating capital. ... If the thing is a ship or a jetty which is ordinarily used for the purpose of earning profits, the fact of its profitability is an element to be considered in assessing its capital value. ... Where, however, there is only a partial injury, as there was in the present case, there are necessarily two elements to be considered if the owner is to be put back, so far as money can do it, in the same position he would have been but for the tortfeasor’s wrongdoing. ...
T Rev B decision
Quinten Van De Vrie, MRS Tiny Van De Vrie v. Minister of National Revenue, [1982] CTC 2781, 82 DTC 1797
The improvements were estimated to contribute approximately $15,000 to the value of the property and a downward adjustment was considered reasonable. ... The purchaser was an adjacent property owner and a downward adjustment was considered but no adjustments are warranted. ... The net annual rent was calculated to be $2,555 and a competitive interest rate of 8 /2% was considered reasonable. ...
T Rev B decision
William Robulak, Emily Vaselenak, Eunice Robulak v. Minister of National Revenue, [1979] CTC 2991, 79 DTC 808
The market information considered by Mr Zezulka involved five sale transactions of land on the east side of the river. ... Sales “3” “4” and “5” were the only sales considered by Mr Zezulka of lands destined for residential use. ... The wording of the law must be considered. Indeed, what does the word “benefit” mean in section 60.1 quoted above? ...
T Rev B decision
Ralph G Mersereau v. Minister of National Revenue, [1977] CTC 2412, 77 DTC 290
The Minister, in due course, considered the facts of the case and concluded that the appellant had had a capital gain as a result of the transaction and so assessed him to tax on one-half of that gain. ... In February 1972 the appellant had what was originally considered to be a heart seizure and was immediately confined to a hospital. ... Having then considered this risk separately, I believe the capitalization rate of 12.5% on the income from operations is reasonable. ...
T Rev B decision
Ace Holdings Limited v. Minister of National Revenue, [1976] CTC 2281, 76 DTC 1219
Appellant’s counsel also stated that the reasons given by Mr Trudel were not valid in fact and in law because the Minister had already considered the land as investment, the vast majority of which was expropriated. ... All the land in question was, at one time or other, considered a prime prospect for a shopping centre. ... Furthermore, for ten years the Minister has considered that this land was being held as investment and has demanded that the appellant capitalize the carrying charges. ...
T Rev B decision
Arnold Kostiner, Marsted Holdings Ltd, Hyman Fisher v. Minister of National Revenue, [1978] CTC 3063, [1978] DTC 1746
He covered each point which he felt should be considered in reviewing such a Case: 1. commercial rental property; 2. originally one tenant; 3. certain facilities particularly suitable to that tenant; 4. railroad siding nearby; 5. long-term lease; 6. options to renew: 7. property in a good location; 8. return from investment good; 9. ... In my opinion, to. determine a question of the kind posed at this hearing, particularly dealing with the purchase and sale of land and considered against the background just described, requires the following: (a) An examination of the appellants’ personal and business circumstances at the time of acquisition, as such circumstances conflicted with, or complemented the probable fulfillment of their stated intention. ... Suffice it to say that had the reassessment of the Minister rested on that proposition—‘the appellant considered the possibility of resale at a profit’— in my opinion, it would have been made on extremely tenuous grounds. ...
T Rev B decision
Place Des Soeurs Inc v. Minister of National Revenue, [1978] CTC 3188, [1978] DTC 1862
Can it not be said, however, that a fortiori the sale of the “cathedral” must be considered a commercial sale or at least a “concern in the nature of trade”, within the meaning of the word “business” as defined in subsection 248(1) of the new Act? ... The intention is the chief factor making it possible to decide whether the sale of a building should be considered as being in the nature of trade within the meaning of the Income Tax Act. Other circumstances may also be considered. In the case at bar the Board considers them immaterial as compared with the Original intention and the actions taken to carry out this intention. ...
T Rev B decision
Alpine Management Corporation Limited v. Minister of National Revenue, [1980] CTC 2338, [1980] DTC 1300
Panartic advised that, contrary to what had previously been considered, the company would not lease space in the Ford Tower, (Exhibit A-23). ... All the appellant’s witnesses were considered by the Board as reliable witnesses. ... He was satisfied that the Bow Valley Building cash flow warrantied such a loan and considered it a good investment and indeed recommended it. ...
T Rev B decision
Vincent Debenedictis, Giovanna Debenedictis v. Minister of National Revenue, [1983] CTC 2183, 83 DTC 167
Evidence to be considered in deciding as to the purchaser’s intention is what he himself says it was. However, the purchaser’s declaration of intention is only one of the factors to be considered. ... A professed intention cannot be considered as determining what it is that the concrete acts amount to. ...
T Rev B decision
Northern Peat Moss Co LTD v. Minister of National Revenue, [1982] CTC 2855, 82 DTC 1866
According to Mr Yuh, he considered the real estate portion of the farm, not the business portion. ... Analysis 4.01 The Board thinks that the activities of Bell Farms Ltd must be considered as a business. ... Hence its Capital cost allowance must be considered normal expenses in the computation of the income of a business despite the fact that, according to the Income Tax Act, the taxpayer is not obliged to deduct the capital cost allowance, and also, despite the fact that when it is deducted, it is not out-of-pocket money. ...