Search - considered

The Queen, 87 DTC 5277, [1987] 2CTC 23 (FCTD)-- summary under Subparagraph 8(1)(i)(iv) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 8- Subsection 8(1)- Paragraph 8(1)(i)- Subparagraph 8(1)(i)(iv) Dues in order to be considered annual must be of a recurring kind, as opposed to initiation or entrance dues paid once and for all on becoming a member. ...

The Queen, 2004 DTC 2784, 2004 TCC 381 (Informal Procedure)-- summary under Subsection 2(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 2- Subsection 2(1) After the taxpayer took an assignment (initially scheduled for two years) to work in Belize she maintained her home in Vancouver where her son and family resided, maintained her banking and financial interests in Canada, visited her connections in Vancouver approximately once per year, had no intention to reside on any permanent basis in Belize and considered Vancouver as a place where she could reconnect if need be. ...

The Queen, 84 DTC 6087, [1984] CTC 141 (FCTD), aff'd 86 DTC 6164, [1986] 1 CTC 388 (FCA)-- summary under Paragraph 253(b) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 253- Paragraph 253(b) Under the law of Colorado, which was the proper law of the contracts between the American plaintiff and a Canadian finance company, the Canadian finance company could not be considered the agent of the plaintiff with regard to creditor's group insurance policies which the Canadian company was issuing instead on its own account. ...

New Brunswick [1972] S.C.R. 471 indicated that subsequent amendments might be considered as part of the legislative history bearing on the construction on the amended statute, this did not mean, in light of s. 45(3) of the Interpretation Act, that subsequent amendments could themselves serve as a declaration concerning the previous state of the law. ...

., 96 DTC 6065, [1996] 2 CTC 55 (FCA)-- summary under Subsection 1204(1) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Regulations- Regulation 1204- Subsection 1204(1) Although the taxpayer (which was a participant in the Syncrude oil sands project) went on to achieve partial success on other grounds, Pratte J.A. first found that the trial judge erred in finding that in order for the taxpayer to be considered to be "producing" petroleum, it was necessary that there be a prospect of the Syncrude project being profitable in the near future, and also found that the oil producing activities of the project commenced when the mining of the oil sands deposits commenced rather than when the first barrel of synthetic crude was produced. ...

Bowie J. found that the plans had not been entered into with considered judgment as to their commercial benefit to the taxpayers' firm. ...

The fact that (as happened twice in the course of 22 years) the directors might, if they considered that business conditions so demanded, reduce or cancel the amount that had been set up, was not a contingency which negated the fact that the amount set up in the company's books constituted an existing liability. ...

The mere keeping of such records cannot be considered part of a solicitor's work. ...

The Queen, 97 DTC 846, [1997] 1 CTC 2291 (TCC)-- summary under Substance Summary Under Tax Topics- General Concepts- Substance Payments made by Canadian franchisees to the taxpayer that were calculated as a mark-up on the value of products sold by the taxpayer to them were found not to be royalties for purposes of s. 212(1)(d) notwithstanding that, in order to avoid the application of the Robinson Patman Act, the franchise agreement provided that the mark-ups "shall be deemed to be considered a license fee charged for the license granted by the Franchise Agreement to Franchisee to use the Proprietary Marks in connection with the Franchisee's operation of an Entré Computer Center at the Center Location". ...

The Queen, 97 DTC 846, [1997] 1 CTC 2291 (TCC)-- summary under Paragraph 212(1)(d) Summary Under Tax Topics- Income Tax Act- Section 212- Subsection 212(1)- Paragraph 212(1)(d) Payments made by Canadian franchisees to the taxpayer that were calculated as a mark-up on the value of products sold by the taxpayer to them were found not to be royalties for purposes of s. 212(1)(d) notwithstanding that, in order to avoid the application of the Robinson Patman Act, the franchise agreement provided that the mark-ups "shall be deemed to be considered a license fee charged for the license granted by the Franchise Agreement to Franchisee to use the Proprietary Marks in connection with the Franchisee's operation of an Entré Computer Center at the Center Location". ...