Search - considered

I specifically have not considered whether the appellant satisfies the condition in subparagraph 109(1)(b)(i) as affected by subsection 109(4) because the conditions in subparagraphs 109(1)(b)(i) and (ii) are conjunctive, as are the conditions in clauses (A), (B) and (C); and his failure to satisfy clause (C) is fatal to his claim under paragraph 109(1)(b) for 1987. ... The effect of the impugned distinction or classification on the complainant must be considered. ...

Article 7.04 is worth noting: Nothing herein contained shall be nor shall it be deemed to create a partnership relationship, joint venture or association of any kind between the Owner or Owners and the Project Manager, and any right of ownership to property and assets shall be a separate, sole and individual right, and the Owners or any one Owner shall not be considered or deemed to be carrying on business with the Project Manager. ... These types of duties to be performed by Laidley in respect of which "Special Duty Fees" were payable by the appellant involve four classes of expenses that have been considered by the respondent to be, as far as the appellant was concerned, expenses of a current nature. ...

In coming to this conclusion, the Court considered subsections 152(3) and 152(8) and section 166. ... He said at age 2274 (D.T.C. 257): “In my view, the Amended Reply cannot be considered as, or have the effect of, an assessment or a reassessment regardless of what it may contain.” ...

In finding in favour of Revenue Canada the learned chambers judge considered subsection 224(1.2) to have a "plain meaning that is unambiguous”. ... The reasons for judgment of the learned chambers judge, dated January 19, 1989 (which we have just considered) by its express terms, did not cover funds claimed by Revenue Canada other than those sufficient to cover the penalty imposed by it upon International Warranty for non payment. ...

The following criteria should be considered: the profit and loss experience in past years, the taxpayer's training, the taxpayer's intended course of action, the capability of the venture as capitalized to show a profit after charging capital cost allowance. ... The Court has therefore considered Graham v. The Queen, [1983] C.T.C. 370; 83 D.T.C. 5399 (F.C.T.D.), affd [1985] 1 C.T.C. 380; 85 D.T.C. 5256 (F.C.A), Poirier, B. ...

., [1986] 2 C.T.C. 380; 86 D.T.C. 6518, wherein the court considered the predecessor section of subsection 225.2(2):... the issue is not whether the collection per se is in jeopardy, but rather whether the actual jeopardy arises from the likely delay in the collection thereof. ... The key portion is as follows: where... a judge is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the collection of all or any part of an amount assessed in respect of a taxpayer would be jeopardized by a delay in the collection thereof, The repealed section of the Income Tax Act respecting jeopardy collection reads: 225.2(1)... where it may reasonably be considered that collection of an amount assessed in respect of a taxpayer would be jeopardized by a delay in the collection thereof... ...

., considered by the Supreme Court of Canada in Curran v. M.N.R, [1959] S.C.R. 850; [1959] C.T.C. 416, where it was held by three of the members of the panel that [C.T.C. page 421]: The word must receive its ordinary meaning bearing in mind the distinction between capital and income and the ordinary concepts and usages of mankind. The trial judge on this basis made this finding [1986] 1 C.T.C. at page 10: In my view, where amounts, in this case money, are received by a person for his or her own benefit, those amounts, generally speaking, must be considered either as a receipt of a capital nature or as an income receipt. ...

Justice Cullen says [C.T.C. page 123]: There is also an argument to be made that the residence of the employer is not the only factor to be considered in determining situs of income. ... Justice Dickson in the Nowegijick case and says [C.T.C. page 123]: Therefore, the place of payment of wages may also be a factor to be considered when dealing with the question of situs. ...

Subsection 37(2) of the Interpretation Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. 1-23, clearly indicates that the amendment of an enactment cannot be used as a guide as to the real meaning of the original provision: The amendment of an enactment shall not be deemed to be or to involve a declaration that the law under such enactment was or was considered by Parliament or other body or person by whom the enactment was enacted to have been different from the law as it is under the enactment as amended. ... I should point out that the Court considered three decisions of the Tax Review Board cited by counsel for the respondent: Payette v. ...

The Minister also gave notice to the petitioners that it might reasonably be considered that collection of the amounts assessed would be jeopardized by delay in collection and he demanded payment forthwith of the amounts claimed in the assessments. Subsection 225.2(1) of the Income Tax Act provides: 225.2 (1) Collection in jeopardy. — Notwithstanding section 225.1, where it may reasonably be considered that collection of an amount assessed in respect of a taxpayer would be jeopardized by a delay in the collection thereof, and the Minister has, by notice served personally or by registered letter addressed to the taxpayer at his latest known address, so advised the taxpayer and directed the taxpayer to pay forthwith the amount assessed or any part thereof, the Minister may forthwith take any of the actions described in paragraphs 225.1 (1)(a) to (g) with respect to that amount or that part thereof. ...