Bowland v. R., 99 DTC 998, [1999] 4 CTC 2530 (TCC) -- summary under Improvements v. Repairs or Running Expense

By services, 28 November, 2015

In finding that the costs of substantial repairs incurred to remedy extensive fire damage were capital expenditures, Hamlyn TCJ. stated (at p. 1000) that "the effect of the expenditures brought the rental property back into existence. The house was virtually rebuilt and resulted in a new capital asset".

Topics and taglines
Topic
Income Tax Act - s. 18(1)(b) - Capital Expenditure v. Expense - Improvements v. Repairs or Running Expense
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
335597
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em>Bowland v. The Queen</em></strong>, 99 DTC 998, Docket: 98-362-IT-G (TCC)",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}