Search - considered

Its memos and documents indicate that the Appellant considered that the value of the site would increase in any event resulting in limited risk to the Appellant. 9(k) Is correct, according to the Appellant's own inter-office documents. 9(n) Is not correct. ... It refused possible leases to stores it considered to be possible competition to Safeway and it vetoed construction of store sites that it felt intruded on suitable parking space. 9(o) The Appellant was not "involved" in all of this; SPL was, except for the Appellant's listing of its interest for sale. ... The Appellant considered the store site to be ideal and necessary to buy for its own store and to prevent a competitor from building on or near that site. ...

In determining the issue herein, I am guided by the statement of Cat- tanach, J in Willumsen v MNR, [1967] CTC 13; 67 DTC 5022 where he states at pages 18, 5026: As I conceive it the correct approach to the solution of a problem of this kind of case in any given set of circumstances is first to examine the taxpayer’s acts and operations objectively, bearing in mind that the question is one of fact in each particular case and that the appellant’s statement at the trial is only part of the evidence and must be considered along with all the objective facts. If, after consideration of these facts, it should be concluded that the inference to be drawn is one of “trading”, then the matter must be considered to ascertain if there is some Satisfactory explanation, consistent with the facts as found, which would negative that prima facie inference. ... He does not claim to have considered any such plan himself in relation to the share in the lands that he acquired from McLean on February 23, 1973. ...

The question of when a debt is to be considered uncollectible is a matter of the taxpayer’s own judgment as a prudent businessman. ... Fisher described how this determination should be made: For the purposes of the Income Tax Act, therefore, a bad debt may be designated as the whole or a portion of a debt which the creditor, after having personally considered the relevant factors mentioned above in so far as they are applicable to each particular debt, honestly and reasonably determines to be uncollectable at the end of the fiscal year when the determination is required to be made, notwithstanding that subsequent events may transpire under which the debt, or any portion of it, may in fact, be collected. ... In the same financial statements, we find this note: The parent company has undertaken to provide any additional working capital which the company may require in the next twelve months. [2] For these reasons, I do not think that the unpaid accounts owing by Flexi S.A. to Flexi, attributable to the unpaid accounts owing by Flexi U.K. to Flexi S.A., should have been considered to have become uncollectible. ...

It was argued that fold-down trailers tend to be used for weekend recreation, rather than for longer periods, but it was also shown that trailers, by their very nature, are considered as temporary housing. ... For that reason I do not find the cases to which we were referred, in which the meaning of the word has been considered, to be of much assistance. ... If the sentence in question were all the Board had to say on the subject it might be considered that the statute had been misinterpreted as meaning that all trailers capable of use for living purposes, however casual, as opposed to use for hauling goods would qualify for the exemption. ...

Accordingly, the new shared-custody provisions must be considered for the last month of the Period, namely July 2011.   ... “eligible individual” in respect of a qualified dependant at any time means a person who at that time   (a)  resides with the qualified dependant,   (b)  is a parent of the qualified dependant who   (i) is the parent who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant and who is not a shared‑custody parent in respect of the qualified dependant, or   (ii) is a shared-custody parent in respect of the qualified dependant,   […]   and for the purposes of this definition,   (f)  where the qualified dependant resides with the dependant’s female parent, the parent who primarily fulfils the responsibility for the care and upbringing of the qualified dependant is presumed to be the female parent,   (g) the presumption referred to in paragraph (f) does not apply in prescribed circumstances, and   (h) prescribed factors shall be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing;   [16]         The legislation above is the version currently in force, and it refers to the shared-custody rule. ... For the purposes of paragraph (h) of the definition “eligible individual” in section 122.6 of the Act, the following factors are to be considered in determining what constitutes care and upbringing of a qualified dependant:   (a) the supervision of the daily activities and needs of the qualified dependant;   (b) the maintenance of a secure environment in which the qualified dependant resides;   (c) the arrangement of, and transportation to, medical care at regular intervals and as required for the qualified dependant;   (d) the arrangement of, participation in, and transportation to, educational, recreational, athletic or similar activities in respect of the qualified dependant;   (e) the attendance to the needs of the qualified dependant when the qualified dependant is ill or otherwise in need of the attendance of another person;   (f) the attendance to the hygienic needs of the qualified dependant on a regular basis;   (g) the provision, generally, of guidance and companionship to the qualified dependant; and   (h) the existence of a court order in respect of the qualified dependant that is valid in the jurisdiction in which the qualified dependant resides ...

If it is established that the voluntary disclosure was not substantially complete because the taxpayer disclosed only those amounts or areas of fraud which the taxpayer thought the Department would become aware of, or would accept as being complete, the disclosure will not be considered as voluntary but rather as a further attempt to deceive the Department. ... A detailed submission will not be required at the first contact, however, that initial contact will be considered the date of the voluntary disclosure. 4. ... By his necessary disclosure of materials which he, with some reason, considered to be inviolate, as may well have Mr. ...

Counsel for the defendants referred to certain statements by Noël, J in Yardley Plastics of Canada Ltd v MNR, [1966] Ex CR 1027; [1966] CTC 215; 66 DTC 5183 in support of his argument that de facto control should prevail even in a case where two corporations might be considered associated in the strict sense of subsection 251(1)(2). ... It appears clear in this latter case that the question is first and foremost one of fact, and that it is indeed de facto control that must be considered. ... De facto control cannot be considered in such a situation, when there is de jure control based on an immediate family relationship between ali the members. ...

  [17]         In addition, NTL stated that it relied on the policy adopted by the CRA with respect to amended returns; namely that under some conditions, amended returns will be considered by the CRA as the facto waivers. ...   [19]         T he Federal Court of Appeal considered the effect of amended returns in Armstrong v The Queen, 2006 DTC 6310. ... In the September letter, the Minister stated that the objections for the Taxation Years had not been filed within 90 days from the issuance of the Notice of Assessment or Reassessment and could not, therefore, be considered.   ...

Before reaching a decision, the courts have considered various factors or indices to be relevant. ... I have considered the fact that offers-to-purchase were made and declined, and that the properties were not listed for sale but were sold as the result of an unsolicited offer. ... I have also considered the time frame between the actual purchase, March 5, 1979, and the eventual closing date of October 31, 1980, as some evidence of no intention to sell. ...

Because of that, I considered very closely the evidence of the plaintiff and his legal adviser. ... But ORI considered his services valuable; it wanted to tie him to the parent company. ... He requested him, as well, to advise the appropriate Securities Exchange authorities in Washington of what he (the plaintiff) considered to be possible violations of security laws. ...