Search - كليشات مرتبطين

11 November 2020- 11:18pm Yellow Point – Federal Court of Appeal confirms that an ecological gift was made in the year before it was certified as such Email this Content A taxpayer, who donated an interest in ecologically sensitive land to two qualified donees in 2008, unsuccessfully argued that the gift was not made until 2009 for purposes of computing the five-year (now 10-year) carryforward period described in s. 110.1(1)(d)(iii), because it was not until 2009 that he received the certification from the Minister of the Environment as to the land's ecologically sensitive nature and value that was required under that provision. In confirming that the ecological gift instead was made in 2008 when the gifted property was transferred, Noël CJ stated: [W]hen property is gifted … the disposition takes place when ownership of the gifted property is transferred from the donor to the donee … … There is no doubt that the appellant’s entitlement to the capital gain exemption and the related deduction did not arise until 2009 when all the conditions set out in paragraph 110.1(1)(d) and subsection 110.1(2) were met, but this does not alter the time when the “gift was made”. Noël CJ also effectively found that the word “peut” (may) in the French version of s. 118.1(11) meant the same thing as the word “shall” in the English version, stating in this regard: [T]he use of the word “peut” in the French version illustrates how “an official who is permitted to do a thing may, in addition, be obliged to do it” (Ruth Sullivan, Sullivan on the Construction of Statutes …). ...

The relevant QSTA provisions, which were broadly similar in this regard to ETA ss. 225(1) – A(a), 228(2) and 222(1), required that a person receiving payment of a policy premium collect the tax thereon as agent for the Minister and remit such tax to the Minister. ... In going on to confirm the imposition of penalties on the taxpayers pursuant to the Tax Administration Act (generally calculated as 15% of the amounts they had remitted one month late), the Court stated: The defence of due diligence allows for the avoidance of administrative penalties imposed by a statute where an error of fact is made in good faith, but not where there is an error of law. … … To allow the taxpayer to escape the consequences of failing to meet its obligations by proposing a different interpretation of the legislative provisions would open a loophole that is difficult to reconcile with [the self-assessment] principle. ... Assurances générales Desjardins Inc., 2022 QCCA 57 under ETA s. 225(1) – A(a) and ITA s. 227(8)(a). ...

28 March 2022- 11:45pm Shaker – Federal Court finds that a trustee of a real estate trust does not hold any “interest in real property” that can be charged by CRA Email this Content CRA obtained an interim order to charge the interest of Mr. ... Shaker’s legal interest in the Blue Jays Way property as trustee, and before ordering the interim charge to be discharged, Walker J stated: Trust property is not available to the creditors of a trustee where the debt in question is the trustee’s personal debt …. ... To conclude otherwise would improperly and adversely impact the interests of the third-party beneficiaries of the VSI Trust. … … Canada North Group stat[ed] “[p]roperty held in trust cannot be said to belong to the trustee because ‘in equity, it belongs to another person’ (Henfrey [[1989] 2 S.C.R. 24]], at p. 31)”. ...

29 September 2016- 9:25pm Chriss – Federal Court of Appeal finds that a written resignation must be signed and delivered to the corporation to start the two-year s. 227.1(4) period running Email this Content The husband of a director had instructed their law firm to prepare a written resignation for her, which they did, but the resignation form was never provided to her. In reversing a finding of Boyle J that this was sufficient to amount to a written resignation that started the two-year limitation period in s. 227.1(4) running, Rennie JA stated: …In the absence of the communication of a written resignation to the corporation, a resignation is not effective. … … Reliance on the subjective intention or say-so of a director alone would allow a director to plant the seeds of retroactive resignation, only to rely on it at some later date should a director-linked liability emerge. ...