Search - considered

From my standpoint, it should be observed that the above estimate could be far too optimistic; that, speaking generally, the planting and growing of trees for timber is not farming within the meaning of paragraph 139(1)(p) of the Act but constitutes reforestation; that, while a forward-looking farmer would be well advised and should be encouraged to protect and build up any natural wood lot on his farm by removing deadwood therefrom and planting trees to provide “some revenue in 20 or 25 years from the sale of fence posts, fuel-wood or pulp-wood” (that is a quotation from a booklet entitled “Planning For Tree Planting” issued by the Department of Lands and Forests of the Province of Ontario), that limited type of activity can only be regarded as purely incidental to such farmer’s main farming operations, and should not, by itself, be considered as a primary farming operation within the definition of “farming” contained in paragraph 139(1)(p) of the Act, and that reforestation is ordinarily a responsibility of government, or for large lumber and pulp-wood companies which are bound by the nature of their industry to have regard for their future timber requirements. ...

Counsel for the respondent argued that the lease was a sham or a mere device because: (A) A corporation is an entity distinct from its shareholders; and a taxpayer is entitled to arrange his affairs if he can do so within the law so as to attract upon himself the least amount of tax, but, as stated in the Shulman case (supra) “Those two principles must however be considered having regard to the fact that in enacting the Income Tax Act, Parliament undoubtedly intended to impose a tax on income’’. ...

That there were serious questions to be considered by the Court regarding the validity of the Will; iii. ...

When the property was sold in 1968 the appellant considered the total sale price of $19,000 to be solely in respect of the land whereas the respondent made the following apportionment: (a) $ 7,220 for land (b) 11,780 for buildings $19,000 One of the respondent’s main allegations was that the appellant in 1968 could have received a gross rental income from the buildings of almost $3,000. ...

During the course of the argument, much appears to have been made of the fact that these shares were not reviewed from time to time and were not considered for disposal by the appellant and therefore were capital investments that he did not intend to sell as and when the time was ripe for a profit but intended to hold indefinitely. ...

In general, it is not very satisfactory to dispose of an issue on account of a procedural omission, especially if the other party cannot be considered to have been seriously harmed in his argument if the correction of such an omission were allowed. ...

The land on which the building was to be built was unserviced and the purchase from the Salvation Army of a small parcel of contiguous land, as well as the servicing of the land, had to be completed before the land could be considered ready for the construction of the build- ing. ...

Goodwill elements are rooted in income sources and are generally considered to be (a) personal or management goodwill; (b) goodwill of location; and (c) goodwill of product or service. ...

Having considered the evidence in its totality, that is, the course of the appellant's farming operation from the date of its inception to the date of hearing of this appeal and the able submissions made by both counsel, I am of the opinion that the appellant's chief source of income was a combination of income from his farm and from the Medical Arts Laboratory Ltd as another source of income and that the restrictive provisions of section 13 of the Act do not apply. 18 Accordingly the appeal is allowed. ...

24 THE CHAIRMAN: That is correct. 25 MR BLUMENFELD: And where we were also required to pay a bank loan in that agreement as well, which the wife had, would that be considered a periodic payment? ...