S.20(6)(g) of the old Act did not apply to the taxpayer's sale of premises pursuant to an agreement which provided that the lands should be "clear of all buildings" on the closing date. First, it could not be said that the equitable ownership of the building was transferred to the purchaser at the time of entering into the agreement of purchase and sale (and prior to the time of its demolition) because the building was not made the subject of the contract. Second, it could not be said for any other reason that the sale involved both the sale of depreciable property and "something else". The contract demonstrably related only to the sale of vacant land. Third, the final words of s. 20(6)(g) contemplate that the subject properties are disposed of "to" a person, and here the demolition of the building did not entail its acquisition by the purchaser.
Topics and taglines
Topic
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
338619
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>The Queen v. Malloney's Studio Ltd.</em></strong>, 79 DTC 5124, [1979] CTC 206, [1979] 2 SCR 326",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>The Queen v. Malloney's Studio Ltd.</em></strong>, 79 DTC 5124, [1979] CTC 206, [1979] 2 SCR 326",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": ""
}