Digests

Decision Information

Decision Content

Will-Kare Paving & Contracting Ltd. v. Canada

A-323-96

Strayer J.A.

20/2/98

5 pp.

Appeal from Tax Court of Canada decision confirming tax assessments in respect of appellant's 1988, 1989, 1990 taxation years-Taxpayer in business of asphalt concrete paving since 1974-Purchased asphalt required from suppliers until 1988, but in that year, acquired asphalt plant-In years in question, sold approximately 25% of plant's production to third parties-Taxpayer claimed capital cost allowance under Income Tax Act, s. 20(1)(a)-Also claimed deductions under Act, s. 127(5) in respect of acquisition costs of asphalt plant as being "qualified property" defined in s. 127(9)-Minister finding asphalt plant not being used "primarily" for "manufacturing or processing of goods for sale"-Tax Court Judge correctly characterized asphalt plant as not being property acquired primarily for the manufacturing of goods for sale-No basis for reviewing finding of fact most important purpose for acquisition of plant to supply asphalt for appellant's own paving business-Tax Court Judge correct to apply principles enunciated by Court in The Queen v. Coopers & Lybrand Ltd. (1994), 94 DTC 6541 (F.C.A.)-Words "goods for sale or lease" should be given same meaning as elsewhere in general law of sale of goods-Rationale of Coopers & Lybrand decision not confined to "repair" situations-Appeal dismissed-Income Tax Act, R.S.C., 1985 (5th Supp.), c. 1, ss. 20(1)(a), 127.

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.