Search - considered

The judgment considered the promissory notes to be merely a simple type of acknowledgment recording the facts of the arrangement. ... Evidently all the members of the family considered the younger brothers and sister would eventually, as they got old enough to fully participate, acquire the same rights as the three older brothers by virtue of the purchase agreement. ... Without in any way holding that in all cases where a farmer and adult members of his family operate a farm together for their mutual profit and benefit a partnership must necessarily be considered as exsiting, I nevertheless believe from the facts of this case, and applying the dictum of Duff J. ...

It was also open to them, of course, and I am of the view that the appellant and the said beneficiaries knew that they could, as beneficiaries, having received such lump sum payments, pay such monies so received into a deferred profit-sharing plan and obtain the benefit of the relieving provisions as then existing of Section 11(1) (u) of the Income Tax Act, but nowhere is there any evidence that the appellant or the said four officers of it, the four members of the Strasser family, ever considered or intended to adopt this latter course of action. ... I say this notwithstanding that prior to December 31, 1964 the company and its executive officers considered setting up the pension plan and considered such pension plan in two parts, namely, one under the provisions of Exhibit A-4 into which funds would be paid and subsequently transferred or caused to be reinvested by the beneficiaries after pay-out into a deferred profit-sharing plan under the provisions of Section 79C of the Act; obtained the Minister’s approval for past service or special payment contributions to such a plan under Section 76 of the Act; and obtained the registration of such a plan so as to be a plan within the meaning of a registered pension plan under Section 139(1) (ahh) of the Act so as to qualify current contributions to such a plan as a deduction under Section 11(1) (g) of the Act. ... And at pages 112-113 [p. 568]: These facts lead me to the conclusion that while there was a partnership agreement, it was never considered by the respondent as binding on him. ...

On the contrary, it would appear from the recitals in the deed of William Morris to the appellant, dated May 1, 1945, that the father then considered that following the death of his wife in 1941, he and his son, the appellant, were the owners as joint tenants of the property. ... As will be seen later, the appellant considered himself to be thereafter the owner in fee simple of the property when executing four mortgages thereon. ... Ford, it is also reasonable to infer that both the appellant and his wife considered that the sisters had accepted the mortgage for $3,000 in payment of all their rights under the trust agreement and in the property and that later on they were content to accept $2,300 in settlement of their rights. ...

Consequently, the appellant cannot be considered as having been organized as a tax exempt pension society. ... Consequently, it cannot be considered as a pension society in the ordinary sense of the term and, to that extent, its name is a misnomer. ... Woodward’s mind, when the organization of the appellant was being considered, to establish a tax exempt pension society that would enjoy the benefits of Section 5(1) (h) of the Income War Tax Act that purpose was never accomplished. ...

What is the line which separates the two classes of cases may be difficult to define, and each case must be considered according to its facts; the question to be determined being— Is the sum of gain that has been made a mere enhancement of value by realising a security, or is it a gain made in an operation of business in carrying out a scheme for profit-making? ... Kelly, [1943] 2 All E.R. 119, that the intention with which a transaction was entered into is a feature that should be considered under the British Income Tax Act. ... The question which was there being considered by the Court of Appeal was not whether or not the discounts and premiums in question were profits of a trade but whether or not they were income chargeable to tax under Case V of Schedule D of the English statute as income from possessions out of the United Kingdom or under Case III of Schedule D as discounts, and the judgment was that they were not subject to tax under Case V or Case III. ...

One of the recitals in the said agreement is as follows: 4 ‘WHEREAS, having regard to the guarantee of the Canadian Government, and all other circumstances, it is considered fair and equitable that the remainder of the loss incurred under the ship building agreement, amounting to $450,000 be assumed by the Canadian Government, and that the amount of the outstanding advances be abated accordingly.” ... In the first place I do not think that the benefit received by the appellant by reason of the abatement can be considered as a subsidy. ... As I read the judgment of Rowlatt, J., he considered the benefit received by the taxpayer as something quite outside the scope of its trading activities; something which was conferred on it ‘‘as an act of grace although business methods were. behind it’’. ...

., were capital costs and that therefore they should be considered as capital costs within the meaning of sec. 90. ... The section was further considered by the Supreme Court of Canada in the case of Minister of National Revenue v. ... It was held by Atkinson, J.: "Held: (1) an expense properly and reasonably incurred in the final ascertainment of profits might properly be considered as an outlay in order to earn profits and not an outlay of profits, certainly not of ascertained profits, as the profits were at all times subject to that outstanding expense. ...

MeCool considered it advisable to operate the said Limits (which will hereafter be referred to as ‘‘the Booth Limits’’) and his other assets through the medium of an incorporated com- pany. ... Subsequently, the directors considered these matters, approved of the acquisition of his assets on the basis of that agreement and passed a by-law authorizing the execution of the agreement above referred to and dated November 28, 1941. ... If cost to the taxpayer were the only matter to be considered, the statutory discretion of the Minister would be seriously interfered with and grave abuses could quite easily result. ...

When in doubt, one has to scrutinize the whole course of the taxpayer’s conduct to find out his intention and draw what may be considered as a proper deduction. ... What I have stated is that the sale of a source of income does not always give rise to taxable income, though under certain circumstances it may be considered as income and assessed as such. ... I would readily admit that when a person makes a business of acquiring such sources of income with the intention of disposing of them at a profit and thus carried on a trade of that nature, or has embarked on an adventure in the nature of trade for the same purpose, the capital could be considered as income. ...

From what I have said of them it is I think clear that these core deposits did not have the dual quality of both part payment and security as did those considered in Elson v. Price Tailors Ltd., [1963] 1 All E.R. 231, but were purely security deposits, resembling in that respect those considered in Davies v. ... The deposits in the Shell of China case were held to be capital rather than trading receipts but the deposits in the present case appear to me to have been much more closely related to the appellant’s trading transactions than were the deposits considered in that case and in my view were receipts of a trading or revenue nature within the principle of Landes Brothers v. ...