Search - considered

Counsel for the appellant argues that there is no need to distinguish between appellant’s occupation in the United States and his activities in Canada: any activity on his part was to be considered as being connected with his “enterprise” within the meaning of section 3 of the Protocol and since he was a resident of the United States, this enterprise was necessarily a United States enterprise. ... An individual may well have more than one enterprise, and in any case, an enterprise must have originated in a State and carry out some of its activities there, if it is to be considered “of that State”. ...

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. ... Even the information that the immediately subsequent years continued to show losses would not of itself invalidate the proposition that the efforts and intentions of the taxpayer during the years in question were directed to making a profit. lt seems evident from the Moldowan decision (supra) that at some point in time, and after some experience, the question might well arise whether farming considered as qualifying for “restricted farm losses” had stabilized and become only “hobby farming” and no longer be qualified. ...

The issue in each of the said appeals is whether the profits derived from the purchase and sale of a 50-acre parcel of land in Scarborough is to be considered as a capital gain or whether it is taxable income from a business within the meaning of sections 3, 9 and 248 of the Income Tax Act, SC 1970-71-72, c 63, as amended. ... Mr Meles suggests that the situation in which the appellants find themselves is quite similar and that the profit realized should also be considered as capital gain. ...

In his view, the difficulties that may arise, years later, in trying to ascertain the true facts and the administrative problems involved are such that when an assessment is based on a specific fact and no appeal is taken to contest it, the whole matter must then be considered closed: the Revenue Department should not be faced with the possibility of a new challenge to the same fact in the taxpayer’s computation of his income for subsequent years. ... But such value, to be considered, must be demonstrable, real, economic value—as was obviously the case in the two decisions cited by counsel for the defendant, MNR v Malloney’s Studio Limited, [1975] CTC 542: 75 DTC 5377 and The Queen v William Baziuk, [1976] CTC 787; 77 DTC 5001. ...

The defendant’s principal submission was that because The Royal Bank and Trust Company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Royal Bank and, as a direction by it to the company would probably be respected, documents in the possession of the company should be considered to be in the possession of the Royal Bank within the mean- ing of the rule and, accordingly, the Royal Bank should be ordered to produce them. ... I do not think, therefore, that they can be considered to be in the possession of the Royal Bank within the meaning of the rule. ...

Problem Must the disbursements of $19,270 which were made in 1970 to obtain plans and estimates, demolish fixed walls, erect movable partitions, install a hung ceiling and adapt the electrical and air-conditioning system to the improvements made, be considered business expenses and allowed directly in computing income, or must they be regarded as Capital expenses and allowed as a deduction only through depreciation? ... Based on the extensive experience contained in the cases considered by the courts on the subject of expenses incurred by businessmen or owners of rentable property, general principles have been stated to make it easier to apply the legal provision cited above. ...

Counsel for the respondent suggested, if I understand him correctly, that even though the principal amounts were incurred for the purpose of gaining and producing income, that it is conceivable that the amounts of interest paid could be considered as a payment on account of capital. It seems to me that the nature of the interest payments should normally follow the nature of the principal payments, and since I have concluded that the principal payments were on current account, it follows that the interest payments should also be considered as part of the appellant’s normal business activities and therefore deductible. ...

The outlays cannot be considered as a separate operation isolated from the initial venture, they have none of the characteristics of a regular loan. ... If that is the situation, and I believe that the proper inferences to be drawn from the evidence so indicate, then First Wentworth must be considered to have been or to have become the mere agent of Pigott and it follows, of course, that the expenses of the agent are those of the principal. ...

It becomes obvious therefore that the previous examination and analysis of the geological data done by the witness Rosenblat cannot be considered in the present case but only the actions of the witness subsequent to April 8, 1966. ... Th amount of $19,467.82 less the expenses incurred in earning that income will be therefore considered as taxable. income for the taxation year 1966. ...

It could well be suggested that the extension of this further specific loan of $55,000, even for a short period. and under such circumstances was based on the bank’s opinion of the personal credit not just of the appellant, but to whatever degree the bank considered it a factor, the credit of the appellant and his wife together. ... Neither bank apparently considered it sufficient security by itself to advance further credit to the shareholder. ...