Search - considered

Des Groseillers argues that section 422 does not apply in this case because sections 47.18 to 58.0.7 of the T.A. constitute a complete code that contains, within itself and in an exhaustive manner, all the rules for the computation of income derived from the issuance of securities to employees, as well as all the legal fictions that the legislature considered necessary to adopt in support of those rules. ...

At page 251 he had this to say: The learned Provincial Magistrate in a reserved reasoned decision considered several dictionary definitions of the word “evade” and then continued: “These definitions seem to be divisible into ‘avoid’ or its synonyms and ‘avoid by strategy or craft’ and similar phrases. ...

The defendant’s auditor, Mr C W Williams, testified that the advisability of operating the business with two companies was considered when the defendant was incorporated but as the defendant’s shareholders and their wives were liable to the bond companies, it was decided that this was not worth while. ...

For capital cost allowance purposes, this asset was considered to fall into the following categories: Class 7—$20,875 and special class subject to straight-line depreciation $574,000, making a total of $594,875. ...

On the basis of the facts before me I do not believe that the amounts of $1,500 and $1,300 a year received by the appellant can reasonably be considered as management fees. ...

At the particular time, this area (and when I say the particular time I refer to the time of purchase, when the appellant paid half a million dollars for the property) was considered to be a prime location, being almost in the heart of downtown Montreal. ...

The appellant considered this situation at some length, and in some depth, and finally agreed to sell the land, and the sale took place early in 1972. ...

The Board judges that the appellant company, which had the onus of proving the main allegations set out in its Notice of Appeal, was able to do so and that the agreed profit of $13,270 should be considered to have been a capital gain. ...

Said subsection reads as follows: 58. (4) A reference in this Act to the part of any tax payable or tax otherwise payable that is applicable to any property passing on the death of a deceased shall be construed as a reference to that part of that tax that is proportionate to the value of that property computed as of the date of the death of the deceased or as of such other date as is specified in this Act but as though that property were distributed immediately after that date, and, for the purposes of this Act except Part Il, in determining the part of any tax payable or tax otherwise payable that is applicable to any of the property passing on the death of a deceased, where the property so passing includes (a) any property in respect of which a deduction may, in computing the aggregate taxable value of the property passing on the death of the deceased, be made under any of paragraphs (a) to (h) of subsection (1) of section 7. except paragraph (c) thereof, or (b) any property described in subparagraph (i) of paragraph (c) of subsection (1) of section 7, to the extent of such part of its value as is equal to the amount deductible under that paragraph in computing the aggregate taxable value of the property passing on the death of the deceased, no part of that tax shall be considered as applicable to the property so included. ...

I think that the criteria set out in VR Enterprises, although they are not all the criteria that might be considered, are fair and reasonable in looking at these problems, and I think they have been met in this case. ...