Klanten Farms Ltd. v. The Queen, 2007 DTC 1095, 2007 TCC 348 -- summary under Subsection 44(5)

By services, 28 November, 2015

The taxpayer unsuccessfully submitted that a property acquired by the taxpayer for farming was a replacement property for a property that was used to earn rental income. Paris J. also stated (at p. 1100) that:

"'Use' in paragraph 44(5)(8.1) does not ... include the notion of holding for a future use."

Topics and taglines
Topic
Income Tax Act - s. 44(5)
Tagline
use included holdihg for future uee
Words and phrases
use
d7 import status
Drupal 7 entity type
Node
Drupal 7 entity ID
337993
Extra import data
{
"field_legacy_header": "<strong><em><a name=\"Klanten\"></a>Klanten Farms Ltd. v. The Queen</em></strong>, 2007 DTC 1095, 2007 TCC 348",
"field_override_history": false,
"field_sid": "",
"field_topic_category": "seealso"
}