Search - considered

On the basis of the facts before me I do not believe that the amounts of $1,500 and $1,300 a year received by the appellant can reasonably be considered as management fees. ...

At the particular time, this area (and when I say the particular time I refer to the time of purchase, when the appellant paid half a million dollars for the property) was considered to be a prime location, being almost in the heart of downtown Montreal. ...

The appellant considered this situation at some length, and in some depth, and finally agreed to sell the land, and the sale took place early in 1972. ...

The Board judges that the appellant company, which had the onus of proving the main allegations set out in its Notice of Appeal, was able to do so and that the agreed profit of $13,270 should be considered to have been a capital gain. ...

I think that the criteria set out in VR Enterprises, although they are not all the criteria that might be considered, are fair and reasonable in looking at these problems, and I think they have been met in this case. ...

The appellant’s personal expenditures for the taxation years 1966 to 1969 inclusive are considered just and reasonable and should not be altered. ...

The fact that the appellant required as a condition for the execution of the lease that a $100,000 insurance policy on the life of C Leonard Yanover be purchased by the lessee and made payable to the trustee as security for the payment of rent in the event of the death of C Leonard Yanover cannot reasonably be interpreted in a way that the $100,000 life insurance was considered security for rental payments and that the $75,000 was security for the fulfilment of the lessee’s other covenants. ...

Nor can such requirement be considered as implicit in the contracts, and the Board has no alternative but to apply strictly the wording of paragraphs 11(10)(b) and (c) and to conclude that the rental expenses and the cost of supplies are not deductible. ...

Counsel also referred to the notification by the Minister (Form T2008A) addressed to the appellant and which reads in part: The Honourable the Minister of National Revenue having reconsidered the assessments and having considered the facts and reasons set forth in the Notices of Objection hereby confirms the said assessments as having been made in accordance with the provisions of the Act and in particular on the ground that the Minister has determined that in the taxation years 1968 and 1969 the taxpayer's chief source of income was neither farming nor a combination of farming and some other source of income and therefore his farming losses have been allowed to the extent of $5,000.00 in each of these years in accordance with the provisions of section 13 of the Act. ...

On that valuation, the appellant indicated that he considered his 40% interest to be worth $40,000, and this was the formula that had been used in arriving at $37,500 as the amount of the settlement. ...