Search - considered

It was also advised that Peters Wiles Limited had nothing to do with the procurement of the offer which was being considered and therefore could not ask for a commission. ... Joseph Peters never considered this provision and as a matter of fact had Chiappetta draw up an offer to sell to Kanvest AG his 20% interest. ... The plans for a 41-storey apartment-hotel and a feasibility study therefore were considered long after the purchase. ...

Once the assessment was issued, the appellant asked that its objection, in effect, be considered a notice of appeal to this Board. ... Mr Padulo wrote me on December 2 to say that the matter was being considered. ... All things being considered, counsel submitted that the requirement which the respondent is trying to impose must be set forth clearly in the words of the statute and, since such is not the case, the position taken by the Crown is untenable. ...

This was a scheme which could only be characterized as a venture in the nature of trade when one considered the experience with Shearmat. ... Counsel for the respondent pointed out to the Board certain indications that the appellants had not dealt with the acquisitions as one would deal with an investment, but the main emphasis by counsel was placed on a detailed and complicated proposition that the transactions surrounding the acquisition and disposal of the securities by the appellants constituted a specific venture in the nature of trade—that the gain ‘‘was the result of a carefully considered plan executed as conceived” (quotations from page 187 [5154] of Sissons (supra)). ... I am also satisfied that the prospect of at least getting back their purchase price of the promissory notes was considered. ...

Donald F Stonehouse v MNR, [1967] Tax ABC 1128 at 1133; 68 DTC 63 at 66: Counsel for the appellant contended that gross negligence as referred to in Section 56(2) of the Income Tax Act implied something more than mere carelessness: that it must be considered to be conduct of such marked departure from ordinary reasonable conduct as to amount to something highly reprehensible. Arthur B Haven v MNR, [1969] Tax ABC 833 at 835; 69 DTC 582 at 583: By reason of all this, the appellant has been considered grossly negligent and penalized accordingly by the respondent. ... The comment on the summary of property income of the appellant, attached to the tax return read: NOTE: Share of principal payment received on Zsiros property mortgage receivable is considered to be realization of capital gain on sale of property which took place in 1971. / of $36,000.00 \ $12,000.00 The Board recognizes that the omission of the disputed amount from his reported taxable income was a lack of compliance with the responsibilities under the Act, and that both the ‘appellant and his accountant are experienced and knowledgeable businessmen who, with marginal extra care, could have ensured proper reporting. ...

The basic question confronting the Board is whether or not “arrears” under any circumstances are allowable as a deduction, and whether “back payments” resulting from an order should be considered “arrears” for such purposes. ... This does not clarify the matter greatly, since it is difficult to be certain from the reported judgment that the presiding Member of the Tax Appeal Board considered any part of the lump sum payment as arrears of alimony specifically. ... I think it may be assumed that my colleague considered the $420 mentioned as being so little more, comparatively, than the amount ordinarily payable periodically, that it should be deductible. ...

Contentions The net effect of the reassessments was: (1) to add to the appellant’s income for the year 1970 the amount of $8,500 classified by the Minister as salary or wages and to transfer that amount from the business income reported by the appellant in his 1971 income tax return; and (2) to disallow as expenses the amounts of $5,910.95 for 1971 and $1,442.79 for 1972 since the reported business income for the years 1971 and 1972 was considered by the Minister to have been salary or wages. ... However, later on he broadened out the basis of his position as follows: Now, my friend has spent considerable time in emphasizing control, what control does the master have over the servant and I will fully admit that control is a factor to be considered, but I would not admit in today’s advanced society that it is the factor or the primary factor to consider. ... It might be considered that “control’’ need not always be a physical or even a visible thing. ...

The appellant had no real estate advice as to the rentability or income-producing potential of these properties for the holding period which he anticipated to be about a year and a half before demolition and construction of what he considered to be his future development. ... According to Mr Herrington, the rule of thumb at that time was $2,000 per unit; and even with a unit cost of $1,000, only 114 units could be built and he never considered that a viable proposition. ... Notwithstanding his lack of financial depth, he was very firm in his answer to me, which he repeated, that he never at any time considered the possibility of having to sell these properties to bail himself out (if I may use a colloquial expression) should he not be able to raise the financing required to proceed. ...

It is considered by the jurisprudence that from such connections there is an inference of involvement, and not only the intention but also the conduct of the taxpayer is to be considered. ... It shows a percentage of return on the investment before principal repayments of 11 per cent, and after principal repayments it works out to something like 5.28 per cent which was not considered a good investment. ...

It was proven that the amounts (capital and interest) were paid by the appellant in his capacity as surety. 4.6.2 In order to answer the question as to whether the second condition was met, it must be asked whether the type of risk taken by the appellant may be considered a business, or at least an adventure or concern in the nature of trade, so that the expense could be regarded as having been incurred for the purpose of making a profit. ... The Board also considered the various cases summarized by Dubé J of the Federal Court of Canada in The Queen v H Griffiths Company Limited, [1976] CTC 454; 76 DTC 6261. ... The sum of $9,300 paid by the appellant as surety for Imprimerie Yamaska Limitée must be refused as a deduction in computing the appellant’s personal income. 6.4 The Board considered the possibility of the appellant’s having an endorsement business, since on three occasions, namely in the cases of Les Entreprises Massawippi Inc, Karol Shoes Inc and Imprimerie Yamaska Limitée, the appellant endorsed companies. ...

The taxpayer objected, and on April 4, 1977 the Minister confirmed the assessment, providing this information: The Honourable the Minister of National Revenue having reconsidered the assessment and having considered the facts and reasons set forth in the notice of objection hereby confirms the said assessment as having been made in accordance with the provisions of the Act and in particular on the ground that there was no bona fide acquisition or disposition of the Cominco Ltd bonds. ... Mr Tyrala was not knowledgeable in the trading of the bond market.”_“. he was simply following the advice he received” —.. the purchase of the... bonds... was done to create a profit” —“... as such he should be entitled to whatever benefits are forthcoming from the transaction itself.” —.. it is not our contention that it (Cominco) was obliged ‘to pay interest to Mr Tyrala’, it is only our contention that Mr Tyrala was obliged to pay interest to the previous holder of the bonds, and the subsequent holder of the bonds to Mr Tyrala was to pay the interest to him.” —.. the confirmations of purchases and sales are considered to be the vouchers for the fact that delivery could have been taken or made if the purchaser involved in the transaction had held the security long enough...” fact that there were separate purchase and sale orders would indicate there was a purchase.”... ... The Board also finds that the amounts of $1,061.28 charged and credited to the appellant’s trading account at Sandler, even if considered “received” or “paid”, were not received or paid as interest. ...