TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1960 (6) TMI 28
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Act of British Columbia and for many years it was controlled by the late Robert William Fiddes, who owned 1699 shares out of its 1700 total issued ordinary shares. During the lifetime of the late Mr. Fiddes the appellant was admittedly a personal corporation within the meaning of s. 68 of the Income Tax Act. Mr. Fiddes died on April 25, 1954. Under his Will the Montreal Trust Company and Elmore Meredith, both of the City of Vancouver, were appointed executors and Letters Probate were granted to them on June 15, 1954. Following the death of Mr. Fiddes, the shares of the appellant were held by these executors and the appellant was controlled by them during the 1955 and 1956 taxation years. For these years, in filing its income tax returns, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of subsection (1), the members of an individual's family are his spouse, sons and daughters whether or not they live together. It is admitted that the income of the corporation qualifies under subs. (b) of s. 68(1). The question is whether the control of the corporation in 1955 and 1956 was such as to qualify it within subs, (a) of s. 68(1). A personal corporation does not pay income tax but its income is taxed in the hands of the shareholders under s. 67 of the Act, which reads: 67. (1) The income of a personal corporation whether actually distributed or not shall be deemed to have been distributed to, and received by, the shareholders as a dividend on the last day of each taxation year of the corporation. (2) No tax is payable u....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i) by an individual resident in Canada; (ii) by such an individual and one or more members of his family who were resident in Canada (family being defined by statute); (iii) by any other person on his or their behalf. In my opinion, the individual first referred to must be a natural living person exercising control on his own behalf. The word does not include executors, whether corporate or otherwise. I say this because that individual first referred to is next referred to in connection with his family. There is no room for executors, whether corporate or otherwise, in this scheme of control. The last mode of control is by any other person on behalf of an individual or on behalf of the individual and members of his family. I can think....