Search - considered

That provision could only assist the Appellant if the withdrawal could be considered to be "pension income". ...

A new order concerning the same subject or matter as a previous order is considered as having replaced the previous order and subsequently becomes the legal basis of the obligation. [13]     Counsel for the Respondent also referred to this Court's decision in Pierre Gagnon v. ...

., cannot be considered a benefit because it adds nothing of value to the recipient's economic situation.... ...

By means of a Notice of Reassessment dated December 29, 2004, the Minister of National Revenue (the "Minister") disallowed $2,950 of the moving expenses as follows: Room & Board in Calgary                                 $1,000 Costs to maintain Lethbridge residence $1,950 Disallowed moving expenses                              $2,950 The Minister considered that the disallowed moving expenses were personal expenditures of the Appellant and not eligible moving expenses. 8.          ...

Counsel for the Respondent has, by the written submissions dated October 7, 2004, agreed, with the consent of the Appellant and her husband that although the Appellant, Sushma Marwaha was living in the same residence with her husband, Yash Marwaha, they were nevertheless to be considered as living separate and apart and pursuant to a written agreement, with the result that the said amount of $8,400.00 in each of said three years is to be included in the income of Yash Marwaha and deducted from the income of the Appellant Sushma Marwaha as contemplated in sections 56 and 60 of the Income Tax Act ("Act"). ...

It is a given that in any business there are fluctuations in revenue from one year to the next, however such an increase compared to other years is totally unrealistic. [16]     I have previously considered the matter of a significant increase in income in Badaan v. ...

Accordingly, Parliament appears to have intended that payments earmarked for specific expenses would not be deductible (or included in the recipient's income) unless the parties specifically agreed to this. [12]     In addition, this interpretation is consistent with the majority of cases that I am aware of that have considered clauses with similar wording, including one decision of the Federal Court of Appeal: The Queen v. ...

In addition, he lost any claim to capital cost allowance for 1993, the year under appeal, as a result of the Software not being considered to be then available for use. ...

As a result, neither entity could carry on without donations, which were very difficult to come by since Rabbi Edery was considered inept. [8]      Rabbi Edery then devised a scheme where he would give a charitable receipt for ten times the amount of cash that would be donated, and if the donor paid by cheque, the cheque would be cashed and 90% of the money returned to the donor. [9]      Rabbi Edery swore that only three donors gave the full amount of the receipt issued and those three donors dealt directly with him. ...

Delorme also stated that his son continued to pay the cost of heating the property, which the Appellant considered to be to his advantage. [6]      Mr. ...