In discussing the replacement of s. 6(a) in the Income War Tax Act by s. 12(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, Kerwin C.J. stated (p. 1127):
"In view of the disappearance of what was s. 6 ... many of the decisions under that Act are inapplicable. However, this Court held ... that a certain degree of latitude must be allowed in determining the question whether the disbursements or expenses were laid out or expended for the purpose of earning the income, i.e., with the object and intent that they should earn the particular gross income reported for the taxation period. Under s. 12(1)(a) of the present Act, it is sufficient that an outlay be made or expense incurred with the object or intention that it should earn income, but since in one sense it might be said that almost every outlay or expense was made or incurred for that purpose, a line must be drawn in the individual case depending upon the circumstances and bearing in mind the provisions of s. 12(1)(b)."