Yes. Gifted capital is acceptable provided the gift is genuine and unconditional and the donors' funds are shown to be lawfully obtained, with the same documentary depth expected of the investor's own money.
A gift shifts the proof, it does not remove it
The requirement is that the capital be lawfully obtained and that it belongs to the investor, at risk, in the enterprise. A gift satisfies ownership if it is truly given, so the instrument must show there is no obligation to repay, no security taken and no expectation of return. The lawful-source requirement then follows the money back through the donors, which is why gifted-funds cases are usually longer files than self-funded ones: two sets of tax records, two sets of asset histories, two sets of bank statements. Where donors are reluctant to disclose their own finances, the case does not work, and that reluctance is better discovered at the outset than after a filing fee has been paid. Any tax consequence of the gift in Canada is a question for a cross-border accountant, and should be asked before the transfer.
Hypothetical example: a retired actuary funds an investment from a severance payment, deferred-compensation payout and savings accumulated over many years. A first review produces a source-of-funds chart that traces each stream from earning event through tax reporting and bank transfer to the investment. Employment agreements, tax slips and account statements settle the point; a current balance cannot explain lawful origin by itself. If one large deposit cannot be documented, the investor must resolve it before filing or use funds with a cleaner trail. Capital must remain genuinely at risk and the investment must support the required job-creation case.